>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of biz ops Manifesto unveiled. Brought to you by Biz Ops Coalition. Hey, Welcome back, everybody. Jeffrey here with the Cube. We're coming to you from our Palo Alto studios. And welcome back to this event. Is the biz Opps Manifesto unveiling? So the biz Opps manifesto and the biz Opps coalition have been around for a little while, But today's the big day. That's kind of the big public unveiling are excited to have some of the foundational people that put their put their name on the dotted line, if you will, to support this initiative to talk about why that initiative is so important. And so the next guest, we're excited to have his doctor, Mick Kirsten. He is the founder and CEO of Task Top. Make great to see you coming in from Vancouver, Canada, I think. Right. >>Yes. Great to be here, Jeff. Thank you. Absolutely. >>I hope your air is a little better out there. I know you had some of the worst air of all of us a couple a couple of weeks back, so hopefully things air, uh, getting a little better. And we get those fires under control? >>Yeah, Things have cleared up now, so yeah, it's good. It's good to be close to the U. S. And it's gonna have the Arabic clean as well. >>Absolutely. So let's let's jump into it. So you you've just been an innovation guy forever Starting way back in the day and Xerox Park. I was so excited to do an event at Xerox Park for the first time last year. I mean that that to me represents along with Bell Labs and and some other, you know, kind of foundational innovation and technology centers. That's got to be one of the greatest one. So I just wonder if you could share some perspective of getting your start there at Xerox Parc. You know, some of the lessons you learn and what you've been ableto kind of carry forward from those days. >>Yeah, I was fortunate. Joined Xerox Park in the computer science lab there at a very early point in my career, and to be working on open source programming languages. So back then, and the computer science lab where some of the inventions around programming around software development names such as Object of programming and ah, lot of what we had around really modern programming levels construct. Those were the teams that had the fortune of working with and really our goal waas. And of course, there's a Z. You know, this, uh, there's just this DNA of innovation and excitement and innovation in the water. And really, it was the model that was all about changing the way that we work was looking at for how we could make it 10 times easier to write. Code like this is back in 99 we were looking at new ways of expressing especially business concerns, especially ways of enabling people who are who want to innovate for their business, to express those concerns in code and make that 10 times easier than what that would take. So we created a new open source programming language, and we saw some benefits, but not quite quite what we expected. I then went and actually joined Charles Stephanie that former chief actor Microsoft, who is responsible for I actually got a Microsoft word as a out of Xerox Parc and into Microsoft and into the hands of Bill Gates and the company I was behind the whole office suite and his vision and the one I was trying to execute with working for him was to, you know, make Power point like a programming language, make everything completely visual. And I realized none of this was really working, that there was something else fundamentally wrong that programming languages or new ways of building software like Let's try to do with Charles around intentional programming. That was not enough. >>That was not enough. So you know, the agile movement got started about 20 years ago, and we've seen the rise of Dev ops and really this kind of embracing of of, of sprints And, you know, getting away from M. R. D s and P. R. D s and these massive definitions of what we're gonna build and long billed cycles to this iterative process. And that's been going on for a little while. So what was still wrong? What was still missing? Why the Biz Ops Coalition? Why the biz ops manifesto? >>Yeah, so I basically think we nailed some of the things that the programming language levels of teams can have. Effective languages deployed softened the club easily now right and at the kind of process and collaboration and planning level agile two decades decades ago was formed. We were adopting all the all the teams I was involved with on. It's really become a solved problem. So agile tools, agile teams actually of planning are now very mature and the whole challenges when organizations try to scale that. And so what I realized is that the way that Agile was scaling across teams and really scaling from the Technology Party organization to the business was just completely flawed. The agile teams had one set of doing things. One set of metrics, one set of tools and the way that the business was working was planning was investing in technology was just completely disconnected and using a a whole different set of measures. It's pretty interesting because I think it's >>pretty clear from the software development teams in terms of what they're trying to deliver, because they've got a feature set right and they've got bugs and it's easy. It's easy to see what they deliver, but it sounds like what you're really honing in on is is disconnect on the business side in terms of, you know, is it the right investment you know. Are we getting the right business? R o I on this investment? Was that the right feature? Should we be building another feature or shall we building a completely different products? That so it sounds like it's really a core piece of this is to get the right measurement tools, the right measurement data sets so that you can make the right decisions in terms of what you're investing, you know, limited resource is you can't Nobody has unlimited resources and ultimately have to decide what to do, which means you're also deciding what not to dio. It sounds like that's a really big piece of this of this whole effort. >>Yeah, Jeff, that's exactly it. Which is the way that the adult measures their own way of working is very different from the way that you measure business outcomes. The business outcomes are in terms of how happy your customers are. Are you innovating fast enough to keep up with the pace of, ah, rapidly changing economy, rapidly changing market and those are those are all around the customer. And so what? I learned on this long journey of supporting many organizations transformations and having them trying to apply those principles vigilant develops that those are not enough. Those measures technical practices, those measures, technical excellence of bringing code to the market. They don't actually measure business outcomes. And so I realized that really was much more around having these entwined flow metrics that are customer centric and business centric and market centric where we needed to go. So I want to shift gears >>a little bit and talk about your book because you're also a best selling author project a product, and and you you brought up this concept in your book called The Flow Framework. And it's really interesting to me because I know, you know, flow on one hand is kind of a workflow in the process flow, and you know that's how things get done and and embrace the flow. On the other hand, you know, everyone now in a little higher level, existential way is trying to get into the flow right into the workflow and, you know not be interrupted and get into a state where you're kind of your highest productivity, you know, kind of your highest comfort. Which floor you talking about in your book, or is it a little bit of both. >>That's a great question, is it's not what I gotta ask very often, cause me, it's It's absolutely both. So the thing that we want to get that we've learned how toe and, uh, master individual flow, that there's this beautiful book by me Holly teachings mentality. There's a beautiful Ted talk about him as well, about how we can take control of our own flow. So my question with the book with project surprise, How can we bring that to entire teams and really entire organizations? How come we have everyone contributing to a customer outcome? And this is really what if you go to the bazaar manifesto? It says, I focus on Out comes on using data to drive, whether we're delivering those outcomes rather than a focus on proxy metrics such as How quickly did we implement this feature? And now it's really how much value did the customs of the future and how quickly did we learn? And how quickly did you use that data to drive to that next outcome? Really, that with companies like Netflix on, like Amazon, have mastered, how do we get that every large organization, every idea, organization and make everyone be a softer innovator. So it's to bring that on the concept of flow to these entering value streams. And the fascinating thing is, we've actually seen the data. We've been able to study a lot of value streams. We see when flow increases, when organizations deliver value to a customer faster developers actually become more happy. So things like that implying that promotes course rise. And we've got empirical data for this. So that beautiful thing to me is that we've actually been able thio, combine these two things and and see the results in the data that you increased flow to the customer, your development or more happy. I >>love it. I love it, right, because we're all more. We're all happier when we're in the flow and we're all more productive winner in the flow. So I that is a great melding of two concepts. But let's jump into the into the manifesto itself a little bit. And you know, I love that you know, that took this approach really of having kind of four key values, and he gets 12 key principles and I just want to read a couple these values because when you read them, it sounds pretty brain dead, right? Of course. Right. Of course, you should focus on business outcomes. Of course, you should have trust and collaboration. Of course, you should have data based decision making processes and not just intuition or, you know, whoever is the loudest person in the room on toe, learn and respond and pivot. But >>what's the >>value of actually just putting them on a piece of paper? Because again, this is not this. These are all good positive things, right? When when somebody reads these to you or tells you these or sticks it on the wall? Of course. But unfortunately, of course, isn't always enough. >>No, I think what's happened is some of these core principles originally from the agile manifested two decades ago. The whole Dev ops movement of the last decade off flow feedback and continue learning has been key. But a lot of organizations, especially the ones undergoing transformations, have actually gone a very different way, right? The way that they measure value in technology innovation is through costs For many organizations, the way that they actually are looking at at their moving to cloud is actually is a reduction in costs, whereas the right way of looking at moving the cloud is how much more quickly can we get to the value to the customer? How quickly can we learn from that? And how could quickly can we drive the next business outcome? So, really, the key thing is to move away from those old ways of doing things that funding projects and call centers to actually funding and investing in outcomes and measuring outcomes through these flow metrics, which in the end are your fast feedback for how quickly you're innovating for your customer. So these things do seem, you know, very obvious when you look at them. But the key thing is what you need to stop doing. To focus on these, you need to actually have accurate real time data off how much value your phone to the customer every week, every month, every quarter. And if you don't have that, your decisions are not given on data. If you don't know what your bottle like, it's. And this is something that in the decades of manufacturing car manufacturers, other manufacturers master. They always know where the bottom back in their production processes you ask, uh, random. See, I all want a global 500 company where the bottleneck is, and you won't get it there. Answer. Because there's not that level of understanding. So have to actually follow these principles. You need to know exactly where you follow like is because that's what's making your developers miserable and frustrated on having them context, which on thrash So it. The approach here is important, and we have to stop doing these other things right. >>There's so much. They're a pack. I love it, you know, especially the cloud conversation, because so many people look at it wrong as a cost saving device as opposed to an innovation driver, and they get stuck, they get stuck in the literal. And, you know, I think the same thing always about Moore's law, right? You know, there's a lot of interesting riel tech around Moore's law and the increasing power of microprocessors. But the real power, I think in Moore's laws, is the attitudinal change in terms of working in a world where you know that you've got all this power and what will you build and design? E think it's funny to your your comment on the flow in the bottleneck, right? Because because we know manufacturing assumes you fix one bottleneck. You move to your next one, right, You always move to your next point of failure. So if you're not fixing those things, you know you're not. You're not increasing that speed down the line unless you can identify where that bottleneck is, or no matter how Maney improvements you make to the rest of the process, it's still going to get hung up on that one spot. >>That's exactly, and you also make it sound so simple. But again, if you don't have the data driven visibility of where the bottleneck is. And but these bottlenecks are just as you said, if it's just lack, um, all right, so we need to understand is the bottleneck, because our security use air taking too long and stopping us from getting like the customer. If it's that automate that process and then you move on to the next bottleneck, which might actually be that deploy yourself through the clouds is taking too long. But if you don't take that approach of going flow first rather than again the sort of way cost production first you have taken approach of customer centric city, and you only focus on optimizing cost. Your costs will increase and your flow will slow down. And this is just one, these fascinating things. Whereas if you focus on getting back to the customer and reducing your cycles on getting value your flow time from six months to two weeks or 21 week or two event as we see with tech giants, you actually could both lower your costs and get much more value. Of course, get that learning going. So I think I've I've seen all these cloud deployments and modernizations happen that delivered almost no value because there was such a big ball next up front in the process. And actually the hosting and the AP testing was not even possible with all of those inefficiencies. So that's why going flow first rather than costs. First, there are projects versus Sochi. >>I love that and and and and it begs, repeating to that right within a subscription economy. You know you're on the hook to deliver value every single month because they're paying you every single month. So if you're not on top of how you delivering value, you're going to get sideways because it's not like, you know, they pay a big down payment and a small maintenance fee every month. But once you're in a subscription relationship, you know you have to constantly be delivering value and upgrading that value because you're constantly taking money from the customers. It's it's such a different kind of relationship, that kind of the classic, you know, Big Bang with the maintenance agreement on the back end really important. >>Yeah, and I think in terms of industry ship, that's it. That's what catalyzed this industry shift is in this SAS that subscription economy. If you're not delivering more and more value to your customers, someone else's and they're winning the business, not you. So one way we know is that divide their customers with great user experiences. Well, that really is based on how many features you delivered or how much. How about how many quality improvements or scaler performance improvements you delivered? So the problem is, and this is what the business manifesto was was the forefront of touch on is, if you can't measure how much value delivered to a customer, what are you measuring? You just back again measuring costs, and that's not a measure of value. So we have to shift quickly away from measuring costs to measuring value to survive in in the subscription economy. Mick, >>we could go for days and days and days. I want to shift gears a little bit into data and and a data driven, um, decision making a data driven organization. Because right day has been talked about for a long time. The huge big data mean with with Hadoop over over several years and data warehouses and data lakes and data, oceans and data swamps and you go on and on, it's not that easy to do right. And at the same time, the proliferation of data is growing exponentially were just around the corner from from I, O. T and five G. So now the accumulation of data at machine scale again this is gonna overwhelm, and one of the really interesting principles that I wanted to call out and get your take right is today's organizations generate mawr data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be augmented by machine learning and artificial intelligence. I wonder if you can again, you've got some great historical perspective reflect on how hard it is to get the right data to get the data in the right context and then to deliver to the decision makers and then trust the decision makers to actually make the data and move that down. You know, it's kind of this democratization process into more and more people and more and more frontline jobs, making more and more of these little decisions every day. >>Yeah, and Jeff, I think the front part of what you said are where the promises of big data have completely fallen on their face into these swamps. As you mentioned, because if you don't have the data and the right format, you can connect, collected that the right way, you're not. Model it that way the right way. You can't use human or machine learning on it effectively. And there have been the number of data, warehouses and a typical enterprise organization, and the sheer investment is tremendous. But the amount of intelligence being extracted from those is a very big problem. So the key thing that I've known this is that if you can model your value streams so you actually understand how you're innovating, how you're measuring the delivery value and how long that takes. What is your time to value through these metrics? Like for the time you can actually use both. You know the intelligence that you've got around the table and push that balance as it the assay, far as you can to the organization. But you can actually start using that those models to understand, find patterns and detect bottlenecks that might be surprising, Right? Well, you can detect interesting bottle next one you shift to work from home. We detected all sorts of interesting bottlenecks in our own organization that we're not intuitive to me that had to do with more senior people being overloaded and creating bottlenecks where they didn't exist. Whereas we thought we were actually organization. That was very good at working from home because of our open source route. So the data is highly complex. Software Valley streams are extremely complicated, and the only way to really get the proper analysts and data is to model it properly and then to leverage these machine learning and AI techniques that we have. But that front, part of what you said, is where organizations are just extremely immature in what I've seen, where they've got data from all the tools, but not modeled in the right way. >>Well, all right, so before I let you go, you know? So you get a business leader he buys in. He reads the manifesto. He signs on the dotted line. He says, Mick, how do I get started? I want to be more aligned with With the development teams, you know, I'm in a very competitive space. We need to be putting out new software features and engage with our customers. I want to be more data driven. How do I get started? Well, you know, what's the biggest inhibitor for most people to get started and get some early winds, which we know is always the key to success in any kind of a new initiative, >>right? So I think you can reach out to us through the website. Uh, on the is a manifesto, but the key thing is just it's exactly what you said, Jeff. It's to get started and get the key wins. So take a probably value stream. That's mission critical. It could be your new mobile Web experiences, or or part of your cloud modernization platform where your analysts pipeline. But take that and actually apply these principles to it and measure the entire inflow of value. Make sure you have a volumetric that everyone is on the same page on, right. The people on the development teams that people in leadership all the way up to the CEO and one of the where I encourage you to start is actually that enter and flow time, right? That is the number one metric. That is how you measure whether you're getting the benefit of your cloud modernization. That is the one metric that even Cockcroft when people I respect tremendously put in his cloud for CEOs Metric 11 way to measure innovation. So basically, take these principles, deployed them on one product value stream measure into and flow time on. Then you'll actually you well on your path to transforming and to applying the concepts of agile and develops all the way to the business to the way in your operating model. >>Well, Mick, really great tips, really fun to catch up. I look forward to a time when we can actually sit across the table and and get into this, because I just I just love the perspective. And, you know, you're very fortunate to have that foundational, that foundational base coming from Xerox parc. And it's, you know, it's a very magical place with a magical history. So the to incorporate that and to continue to spread that wealth, you know, good for you through the book and through your company. So thanks for sharing your insight with us today. >>Thanks so much for having me, Jeff. Absolutely. >>Alright. And go to the biz ops manifesto dot org's Read it. Check it out. If you want to sign it, sign it. They'd love to have you do it. Stay with us for continuing coverage of the unveiling of the business manifesto on the Cube. I'm Jeffrey. Thanks for watching. See you next time.

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of biz ops Manifesto unveiled Brought to you by Biz Ops Coalition >>Hey, Welcome back, everybody. Jeffrey here with the Cube. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the biz. Opps manifesto Unveil Something has been in the works for a little while. Today's a formal unveiling and we're excited to have three of the core founding members of the manifesto Authors of the manifesto, if you will joining us again. We've had them all on individually. Now we're gonna have a great power panel. First up, we have met Kirsten returning. He's the founder and CEO of Task Top make good to see again. Where you dialing in from? >>Great to see you again, Jeff. I'm dialing from Vancouver, Canada. >>Vancouver, Canada. One of my favorite cities in the whole wide world. Also, we've got Tom Davenport coming from across the country. He's a distinguished professor and author from Babson College. Tom, great to see. And I think you said you're a fund Exotic place on the East Coast. >>Falmouth, Massachusetts, on Cape Cod. >>Nice. Great to see you again. And also joining surge. Lucio. He is the VP and general manager Enterprise Software division at Broadcom Surge. Great to see you again. Where you coming in from? >>From Boston. Right next to kick off. Terrific. >>So welcome back, everybody again. Congratulations. On this day I know it's It's been a lot of work to get here for this unveil, but let's just jump into it. Biz Opps Manifesto What was the initial reason to do this? And how did you decide to do it in a kind of a coalition way, bringing together a group of people versus just making it an internal company, uh, initiative that, you know, you could do better stuff within your own company Surge. Why don't we start with you? >>Yeah, so? So I think we are really a critical juncture, right? Many large enterprises are basically struggling with their digital transformation. In fact, many recognized that the the Business Society collaboration has been one of the major impediments to drive that kind of transformation. And if we look at the industry today, many people or whether we're talking about vendors or system integrators, consulting firms are talking about the same kind of concepts but using very different language. And so we believe that bringing a lot these different players together assed part of the coalition and formalizing, uh, basically the core principles and values in a busy office manifesto. We can really start to have kind of a much bigger movement where we can all talk about kind of the same concepts. And we can really start to provide kind of a much better support for large organizations to transform eso, whether it is technology or services or trading. I think that that's really the value of bringing all of these players together >>and Mick to you. Why did you get involved in this in this effort? >>So I've been closely involved the actual movement since it started two decades ago with that manifesto, and I think we got a lot of improvement at the team level. And I think, as started just noted, we really need to improving. At the business level, every companies trying to become a software innovator trying to make sure that they can pick them, adapt quickly in the changing market economy and what everyone's dealing with in terms of needing to deliver value to customers. Sooner. However, agile practices have really focused that these metrics these measures and understanding processes that help teams be productive. Those things now need to be elevated to the business as a whole, and that just hasn't happened. Organizations are agile. Transmissions are actually failing because they're measuring activities and how they're becoming more agile. Have teams air functioning, not how much quickly they're delivering value to the customer. So we need to now move. Asked that. And that's exactly what the buzz off there's also manifested. Provides, >>right? Right And Tom to you. You've been covering tech for a very long time. You've been looking at really hard challenges and and a lot of work around analytics and data on data evolution. So there's a definitely a data angle here. I wonder if you kind of share your perspective of of what you got excited Thio to sign on to this manifesto? >>Sure. Well, I have. You know, for the past 15 or 20 years, I've been focusing on Data Analytics and AI. But before that, I was a process management guy and a knowledge management guy and a in general. I think, you know, we've just kind of optimized at too narrow a level. Whether you're talking about agile or Dev ops or, um, ml ops. Any of these kind of obs oriented movements, we're making individual project, um, performance and productivity better, But we're not changing the business effectively enough. And that's the thing that appealed to me about the biz ops idea that we're finally creating a closer connection between what we do with technology and how it changes the business and provides value to it. >>That's great, uh, surge back to you, right? I mean, people have been talking about digital transformation for a long time, and it's been, you know, kind of trucking along. And then Cove it hit, and it was instant lights, which everyone's working from home. You've got a lot more reliance on your digital tools, digital communication both within your customer base and your partner base, but also then you're employees. When if you could share how that really pushed this all along, right, because now suddenly the acceleration of digital transformation is higher. Even more importantly, you've got much more critical decisions to make into what you do next. So kind of your portfolio management of projects has been elevated significantly. When maybe revenues are down on. Do you really have Thio prioritize and get it right? >>Yeah. I mean, I'll just start by quoting city An Adele basically recently said that there's bean two years of digital transformation just last two months, and in many ways that's true. Um, but But yet when we look at large enterprises, they're still struggling with kind of a changes in culture that they really need Thio drive to be able to describe themselves. And not surprisingly, you know, when we look at certain parts of the industry, you know, we see some things which are very disturbing, right. About 40% of the personal loans today are being origin dated by Finn tax of a like of Sophie or or ah Lendingclub, right, Not your traditional brick and worked for bank. And so the while there is kind of ah, much more of an appetite, and it's it's more of a survival type driver these days. The reality is that in order for these large enterprises to truly transform and engage on these digital transformation, they need to start to really aligned the business 90 you know, in many ways and make cover that actually really emerge from the court desire to really improve software predictability, but we've which we have really missed is all the way. Start to aligning the software predictability to business predictability and to be able to have continuously continuous improvement and measurement off business outcomes. So by lining, but of this dis kind of inward metrics that I t is typically being using to business outcomes, we think we can start to really help different stakeholders within the organization to collaborate. So I think there is more than ever. There is an imperative to act now, um, and and results. I think it's kind of the right approach to drive that kind of transformation, >>right? I want to follow up on the culture comment with Utah because you've talked before about kind of process, flow and process flow throughout a whore, unorganized ation. And, you know, we talk about people process and tech all the time, and I think the tech is the easy part compared to actually changing the people the way they think and then the actual processes that they put in place. It's a much more difficult issue than just a tech issue to get this digital transformation in your organization. >>Yeah, you know, I've always found that the soft stuff the you know, the culture of the behavior of the values is the hard stuff to change and mawr and mawr. We we realized that to be successful with any kind of digital transformation, you have tow change, people's behaviors and attitudes. Um, we haven't made much progress in that area as we might have. I mean, I've done some surveys suggesting that most organizations still don't have data driven cultures, and in many cases, there is a lower percentage of companies that say they have that then did a few years ago. So we're kind of moving in the wrong direction, which means I think that we have to start explicitly addressing that cultural behavioral dimension and not just assuming that it will happen if we if we build a system, you know, if if we build it, they won't necessarily come right, >>right? So I want to go toe to you, Nick, because, you know, we're talking about work flows and flow. Andi, you've written about flow both in terms of, you know, moving things along a process and trying to find bottlenecks, identify bottlenecks which is now even more important again when these decisions are much more critical because you have a lot less ah, wiggle room in tough times. But you also talked about flow from the culture side on the people's side. So I wonder if you could just share your thoughts on, you know, using flow as a way to think about things to get the answers better? >>Yeah, absolutely. And I'll refer back to what Tom just said. If you're optimize, you need to optimize your system. You need to optimize how you innovate and how you deliver value to the business into the customer. Now what we've noticed in the data since that that we've learned from customers value streams, enterprise organizations, value streams is that what's taking six months and to and to deliver that value, the flow is that slow. You've got a bunch of unhappy developers. Unhappy customers, when you're innovating, have so high performing organizations we can measure their intent flow time in days. All of a sudden, that feedback loop the satisfaction your developers measurably goes up. So not only do you have people context switching last year, delivering so much more value to customers at a lower cost because you've optimized for flow rather than optimizing for these thes other approximately six that we use, which is how efficient my annual team. How quickly can we deploy software? Those are important, but they do not provide the value of agility, of fast learning, of adaptability, of the business. And that's exactly what the bishops manifesto pushes your organization to. You need to put in place this new operate model that's based on flow on the delivery of business value and on bringing value to market much more quickly than you were before, >>right? I love that. I'm gonna go back to Utah, him on that to follow up, because I think I don't think people think enough about how they prioritize what they're optimizing for. Because, you know, if you're optimizing for a vs B, you know you could have a very different product that that you kick out. You know, my favorite example with With Clayton Christensen and Innovator's Dilemma talking about the three inch our drive, if you optimize it for power, you know, is one thing. If you optimize it for vibration is another thing, and sure enough, you know they missed it on the Palm because it was the it was the game council which which drove that whole business. So when you're talking to customers and we think we're here with cloud all the time people optimizing for cost efficiency instead of thinking about it as an innovation tool, how do you help them? Kind of rethink and really, you know, forced them to to look at the at the prioritization and make sure they're prioritizing on the right thing is make just that. What do you optimizing for? >>Oh yeah, you have one of the most important aspects of any decision or attempt to resolve a problem in an organization is the framing process. And, um, you know, it's it's a difficult aspect toe of the decision toe frame it correctly in the first place. Um, there. It's not a technology issue. In many cases, it's largely a human issue. But if you frame that decision or that problem incorrectly too narrowly, say, or you frame it as an either or situation when you could actually have some of both, um, it's very difficult for the process toe work out correctly. So in many cases, I think we need to think mawr at the beginning about how we frame this issue or this decision in the best way possible before we charge off and build a system to support it. You know, it's worth that extra time to think. Think carefully about how the decision has been structured. Right? >>Surge. I wanna go back to you and talk about the human factors because we just discussed you could put in great technology. But if the culture doesn't adopt it and people don't feel good about it, you know it's not gonna be successful. And that's going to reflect poorly on the technology. Even if I had nothing to do with it. And you know, when you look at the core values of the best hopes manifesto, you know a big one is trust and collaboration. You know, learn, responded pivot. Wonder if you can share your thoughts on trying to get that cultural shift s so that you can have success with the people or excuse me with the technology in the process and helping customers, you know, take this more trustworthy and kind of proactive position. >>So I think I think at the ground level, it really starts with the realization that we were all different. We come from different backgrounds. Oftentimes we tend Thio. Blame the data. It's not uncommon my experience that we spend the first, you know, 30 minutes of any kind of one hour the conversation to debate the ability of the data on DSO, one of the first kind of probably manifestations that we've had. Our revelations as we start to engage with our customers is by just exposing high Fidelity data set two different stakeholders from their different lands. We start to enable these different stakeholders to not debate the data, but that's really collaborate to find a solution. So in many ways, when when when we think about kind of the types of changes were trying Thio truly affect around data driven decision making? It's all about bringing the data in context the context that is relevant and understandable for different stakeholders. Whether we're talking about an operator developed for a business analyst, so that's that's the first thing. The second layer, I think, is really to provide context to what people are doing in their specific silo. So I think one of the best examples I have is if you start to be able to align business k p i. Whether you are accounting, you know, with sales per hour or the engagement of your users on your mobile application, whatever it is, if you start to connect that k p I business K p I to the key piece that developers might be looking at, whether it is now the number of defects or velocity or whatever over metrics that they are used to to actually track, you start to be able to actually contextual eyes in what we are. The affecting, basically metric that that is really relevant. And what we see is that this is a much more systematic way to approach the transformation than say, You know, some organizations kind of creating some of these new products or services or initiatives to to drive engagement, right? So, you know, if you look at zoom, for instance, Zoom giving away, it's service thio education is all about. I mean, there's obviously a marketing aspect in there, but it's it's fundamentally about trying to drive also the engagement of their own teams and because now they're doing something for good, and many organizations are trying to do that. But you only can do this kind of things in a limited way. And so you really want to start to rethink? Oh, you connect everybody kind of business objective fruit data. And I always start to get people to stare at the same data from their own lands and collaborating on the data. Right? >>Right. That's good. Uh, Tom, I want to go back to you. You've been studying I t for a long time writing lots of books and and getting into it. Um, Why now? You know what? Why now? Are we finally aligning business objectives with objects? You know, why didn't this happen before? And, you know, what are the factors that are making now? The time for this. This this move with the with the biz ops. >>Well, in much of the past, I t waas sort of a back office related activity. You know, it was important for, um, producing your paychecks and, uh, capturing the customer orders, but the business wasn't built around it. Now, every organization needs to be a software business of data business. A digital business. The anti has been raised considerably. And if you aren't making that connection between your business objectives and the technology that supports it. You run a pretty big risk of, you know, going out of business or losing out to competitors. Totally so. And even if you're in a new industry that hasn't historically been terribly, um, technology oriented customer expectations flow from, you know, the digital native companies that they work with to basically every industry. So you're compared against the best in the world. So we don't really have the luxury anymore of screwing up our I T projects or building things that don't really work for the business. Um, it's mission critical that we do that well, almost every time, >>right. And I just I just wanna fall by that time, in terms of the you've talked extensively about kind of these evolutions of data analytics, from artisanal stage to the big data stage, the data economy stage the ai driven stage. What I find interesting about all the stages you always put a start date. You never put it in date. Um, so you know, is the is the big data. I'm just gonna use that generically moment in time. Finally, here. Where were, you know, off mahogany row with the data scientists, But actually could start to see the promise of delivering the right insight to the right person at the right time to make that decision. >>Well, I think it is true that in general, these previous stages never seem to go away. The three artisanal stuff is still being done, but we would like for less and less of it to be artisanal. We can't really afford for everything to be artisanal anymore. It's too labor and time consuming to do things that way. So we shift Mawr and Mawr of it to be done through automation and be to be done with a higher level of productivity. And, um, you know, at some point maybe we we reached the stage where we don't do anything artisanal e anymore. I'm not sure we're there yet, but, you know, we are We are making progress, >>right? Right. And make back to you in terms of looking at agile because you're you're such a student of agile. When when you look at the opportunity with biz ops, um, and taking the lessons from agile, you know what's been the inhibitor to stop this in the past. And what are you so excited about? you know, taking this approach will enable >>Yeah, I think both surgeon Tom hit on this. Is that in agile? What's happened is that we've been, you know, measuring tiny subsets of the value stream, right? We need to elevate the data's there, developers air working on these tools of delivering features. The foundations for for great culture are there. I spent two decades as a developer, and when I was really happy when I was able to deliver value to customers, the quicker is able to do that. The fewer impediments are in my way, the quicker was deployed and running the cloud, the happier I waas and that's exactly what's happening if we could just get the right data elevated to the business, not just to the agile teams, but really these values of ours are to make sure that you've got these data driven decisions with meaningful data that's oriented and delivering value to customers. None of these legacies that Tom touched on, which has cost center metrics from a nightie, came from where for I t being a cost center and something that provided email on back office systems. So we need thio rapidly shift to those new, meaningful metrics, their customer and business centric. And make sure that every development organization is focused on those as well as the business itself that we're measuring value. And they were helping that value flow without interruption. >>I love that because if you don't measure it, you can't improve on it. And you gotta but you gotta be measuring the right thing. So, gentlemen, thank you again for for your time. Uh, congratulations on the on the unveil of the biz ops manifesto and bringing together this coalition of industry experts to get behind this. And, you know, there's probably never been a more important time than now to make sure that your prioritization is in the right spot. And you're not wasting resource is where you're not gonna get the r. O. I. So, uh, congratulations again. And thank you for sharing your thoughts with us here on the Cube. Thank >>you. All >>right, So we have surged. Tom and Mick. I'm Jeff. You're watching the Cube. It's a biz ops manifesto unveiled. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time. Yeah,

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of biz ops Manifesto unveiled Brought to you by Biz Ops Coalition >>Hey, welcome back, everybody. Jeffrey here with the Q. Come to you from our Palo Alto studios today for a big big reveal. We're excited to be here. It's the biz. Opps manifesto, unveiling things been in the works for a while and we're excited. Have our next guest one of the really the powers behind this whole effort. And he's joining us from Boston. It's surge Lucio, the vice president and general manager Enterprise software division that Broadcom Serge, Great to see you. >>Good to see. Oh, absolutely. So you've been >>in this business for a very long time? You've seen a lot of changes in technology. What is the biz Ops manifesto? What is this coalition all about? Why do we need this today in in 2020? >>Yeah, so? So I've been in this business for close to 25 years, writes about 25 years ago, the agile manifesto was created, and the goal of the actual manifesto was was really to address the uncertainty around software development and the inability to predict the effort to build software. And if you if you roll that kind of 20 years later and if you look at the current state of the industry, the Product Project Management Institute estimates that we're wasting about a million dollars every 20 seconds in digital transformation initiatives that do not deliver on business results. In fact, we we recently served, uh, the number of executives in partnership with Harvard Business Review and 77% off. Those executives think that one of the key challenges that they have is really at the collaboration between business and I t. And that that's been kind of a case for almost 20 years now. Eso the key challenge we're faced with is really that we need a new approach. And many of the players in the industry, including ourselves, have been using different terms. Right? Some are. We are talking about value stream management. Some are talking about software delivery management. If you look at the site reliability engineering movement, in many ways it embodies a lot of this kind of concepts and principles. So we believe that it became really imperative for us to crystallize around kind of one concept and so In many ways, the Bezos concept and the bazaars manifesto are out, bringing together a number of ideas which have been emerging in the last five years or so and defining the key values and principles to finally helped these organizations truly transform and become digital businesses. And so the hope is that by joining our forces and defining kind of key principles and values, we can help kind of the industry not just by, you know, providing them with support, but also tools and consulting that is required for them to truly achieve that kind of transformation, that everybody's >>right, right? So co vid Now we're six months into it, approximately seven months into it. Um, a lot of pain, a lot of bad stuff still happening. We've got a ways to go. But one of the things that on the positive side, right and you've seen all the memes and social media is a driver of digital transformation and a driver of change. Because we have this light switch moment in the middle of March and there was no more planning, there was no more conversation. You suddenly got remote. Workforce is everybody's working from home, and you gotta go, right, So the reliance on these tools increases dramatically. But I'm curious, you know, kind of short of the beginnings of this effort and short of kind of covert, which, you know, came along unexpectedly. I mean, what were those inhibitors? Because we've been making software for a very long time. Write the software development community has has adopted kind of rapid change and and iterative delivery and and sprints what was holding back the connection with the business side to make sure that those investments were properly aligned with outcomes. >>Well, so So that you have to understand that I ts is kind of its own silos. And traditionally it has been treated as a cost center within large organizations and not as a value center. And so as a result, kind of the traditional dynamic between the I t. And the business is basically one of a kind of supplier to to kind of a business on. Do you know if you could go back? Thio? I think Elon Musk a few years ago, basically, at these concepts, off the machines to build the machines and you went as far as saying that the machines or the production line is actually the product, so meaning that the core of the innovation is really about building kind of the engine to deliver on the value. And so, in many ways, way have missed on this shift from, um, kind of I t becoming this kind of value center within the enterprises and any told about culture now culture is is the sum total of behaviors and the realities that if you look at the i t, especially in the last decade with the agile with develops with hybrid infrastructures, it's it's way more volatile today than it was 10 years ago. And so the when you start to look at the velocity of the data, the volume of data, the variety of data to analyze kind of the system, um, it's very challenging for I t. To actually even understand and optimize its own processes, let alone to actually include business as kind of an integral part of kind of a delivery chain. And so it's both kind of a combination off culture which is required a za well as tools, right to be able to start to bring together all these data together and then given the volume variety velocity of the data. We have to apply some core technologies which have only really, truly emerging last 5 to 10 years around machine learning and knowledge. And so it's really kind of a combination of those freaks which are coming together today. Truly, organizations get to the next level, >>right? Right. So let's talk about the manifesto. Let's talk about the coalition, the Biz Ops Coalition. I just like that you put down these really simple you know, kind of straightforward core values. You guys have four core values that you're highlighting, you know, business outcomes over individual projects and outputs, trust and collaboration over side load teams and organizations, data driven decisions. What you just talked about, you know, over opinions and judgment on learned, responded Pivot. I mean, surgery sounds like pretty basic stuff, right? I mean, aren't isn't everyone working to these values already? And I think you touched on it on culture, right? Trust and collaboration, data driven decisions. I mean, these air fundamental ways that people must run their business today or the person that's across the street that's doing it is gonna knock him right off the block. >>Yeah, so that's very true. But so I'll mention the novel survey. We need, uh, think about six months ago and twist in partnership with an industry analyst, and we serve it again. The number of 80 executives to understand how many were tracking business outcomes somebody you have, the software executives I T executives were tracking business outcomes, and the there were. Less than 15% of these executives were actually tracking the outcomes of the software delivery. And you see that every day, right? So in my own teams, for instance, we've bean adopting a lot of these core principles in the last year or so, and we've uncovered that 16% of our resource is we're basically aligned around initiatives which were not strategic for us. I take, you know, another example. For instance, one of our customers in the airline industry uncovered, for instance, that a number of that they had software issues that led to people searching for flights and not returning any kind of availability. And yet, you know, the I T teams whether its operations software involvement were completely oblivious to that because they were completely blindsided to it. And so the connectivity between the in words metrics that Turkey is using, whether it's database I, time cycle, time or whatever metric we use in I t are typically completely divorced from the business metrics. And so at its core, it's really about starting to align the business metrics with with the the software delivered change. Right, this, uh, this system, which is really a core differentiator for these organizations. It's about connecting those two things and and starting Thio infuse some of the actual culture and principles. Um, that's emerged from the software side into the business side. Of course, the lien movement and over movements have started to change some of these dynamics on the business side. And and so I think this thesis is the moment where we were starting to see kind of the imperative to transform. Now Cuvee the obviously has been a key driver for that. The the technology is right to start to be able to leave data together and really kind of also the cultural shifts through agile fruit develops through the SRE movement, fueling business transformation. All of these things are coming together and that are really creating kind of conditions. For the Bezos Manifesto to exist. >>So, uh, Clayton Christensen, great hard professor innovator's dilemma might still my all time favorite business books, you know, talks about how difficult it is for in comments to react to to disruptive change, right, because they're always working on incremental change because that's what their customers are asking for. And there's a good our ally when you talk about, you know, companies not measuring the right thing. I mean, clearly, I t has some portion of their budget that has to go to keeping the lights on, right, that that's always the case. But hopefully that's a an ever decreasing percentage of their total activity. So, you know what should people be measuring? I mean, what are kind of the new metrics? Um, in biz ops that drive people to be looking at the right things, measuring the right things and subsequently making the right decisions investment decisions on whether they should do, you know, move Project a along or Project B. >>So there are really two things, right? So So I think what you are talking about this portfolio management, investment management, right and which, which is a key challenge, right in my own experience, right driving strategy or large scale kind of software organization for years. It's very difficult to even get kind of a base data as to who is doing what. Uh, I mean, some of our largest customers were engaged with right now are simply trying to get a very simple answer, which is how many people do I have, and that specific initiative at any point in time and just tracking that information is extremely difficult. So and and again, back to Product Project Management Institute, they have estimated that on average, I two organizations have anywhere between 10 to 20% of their resource is focused on initiatives which are not strategically aligned. So so that's one dimensional portfolio management. I think the key aspect, though that we are we're really keen on is really around kind of the alignment of the business metrics to the ICTY metrics eso I'll use kind of two simple examples, right and my background is around quality and I have always believed that fitness for purpose is really kind of a key, um, a philosophy, if you will. And so if you start to think about quality is fitness for purpose, you start to look at it from a customer point of view, right? And fitness for purpose for core banking application or mobile application are different, right? So the definition of a business value that you're trying to achieve is different on DSO the And yet if you look at our I t operations are operating there are using kind of the same type of kind of inward metrics like a database off time or a cycle time or what is my point? Velocity, right? And s o the challenge really is this inward facing metrics that the I t. Is using which are divorced from ultimately the outcome. And so, you know, if I'm if I'm trying to build a poor banking application, my core metric is likely going to be up time, right? If I'm if I'm trying to build a mobile application or maybe a social mobile app, it's probably going to be engagement. And so what you want is for everybody across I t to look at these metric and what part of the metrics withing the software delivery chain which ultimately contribute to that business metric in some cases, cycle time, maybe completely relevant. Right again. My core banking up. Maybe I don't care about cycle time. And so it's really about aligning those metrics and be able to start to differentiate. Um, the key challenge you mentioned around the around the disruption that we see is or the investors is. Dilemma now is really around the fact that many idea organizations are essentially applying the same approaches for innovation right for basically scrap work, Then they would apply to kind of over more traditional projects. And so, you know, there's been a lot of talk about to speed I t. And yes, it exists. But in reality are are really organizations truly differentiating out of the operate their their projects and products based on the outcomes that they're trying to achieve? And and this is really where bizarre is trying to affect. >>I love that. You know, again, it doesn't seem like brain surgery, but focus on the outcomes right and and it's horses for courses. As you said this project, you know what you're measuring and how you define success isn't necessarily the same as it is on this other project. So let's talk about some of the principles we talked about the values, but you know I think it's interesting that that that the bishops coalition, you know, just basically took the time to write these things down, and they don't seem all that super insightful. But I guess you just got to get him down and have them on paper and have it in front of your face. But I want to talk about, you know, one of the key ones which you just talked about, which is changing requirements right and working in a dynamic situation, which is really what's driven. You know this, the software to change and software development because, you know, if you're in a game app and your competitors comes out with a new blue sword, you've got to come out with a new blue swords. So whether you have that on your compound wall, we're not. So it's It's really this embracing of the speed of change and and and making that you know the rule, not the exception. I think that's a phenomenon. And the other one you talked about his data right and that today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be generated by machine learning and ai and you know and the big data thing with a dupe you know, started years ago. But we are seeing more and more that people are finally figuring it out that it's not just big data on It's not even generic machine learning artificial intelligence. But it's applying those particular data sets and that particular types of algorithms to a specific problem to your point, to try to actually reach an objective. Whether that's, you know, increasing the your average ticket or, you know, increasing your check out rate with with with shopping carts that don't get left behind and these types of things. So it's a really different way to think about the world in the good old days, probably when you got started, when we had big Giant you know, M R D s and P R. D s and sat down and coded for two years and and came out with a product release and hopefully not too many patches subsequently to that. Yeah, >>it's interesting right again, back to one of these service that we did with about 600 the ICTY executives and we we purposely designed those questions to be pretty open. Andi and one of them was really wrong requirements, and it was really around. Kind of. What is the best approach? What is your preferred approach towards requirements? And if I remember correctly, Over 80% of the ICTY executives said that the best approach their preferred approach is for requires to be completely defined before self for the bombing starts, let me pause there. We're 20 years after the agile manifesto, right, and for 80% of these idea executives to basically claimed that the best approach is for requires to be fully baked before solved before software development starts basically shows that we still have a very major issue again. Our apotheosis in working with many organizations is that the key challenges really the boundary between business and I t. Which is still very much contract based. If you look at the business side, they basically are expecting for I t deliver on time on budget, Right? But what is the incentive for I t to actually deliver on the business outcomes, right? How often is I t measured on the business outcomes and not on S L. A or on a budget secretary, and so that that's really the fundamental shift that we need to. We really need to drive up to send industry andi way. Talk about kind of this dis imperative for organizations to operate. That's one. And back to the, you know, various doors still, Um, no. The key difference between these large organization is really kind of a. If you look at the amount of capital investment that they can put into pretty much anything, why are they losing compared Thio? You know, startups. What? Why is it that more than 40% off personal loans today are issued not by your traditional brick and mortar banks, but by start ups? Well, the reason, Yes, it's the traditional culture of doing incremental changes, not disrupting ourselves, which Christenson covered at length. But it's also the inability to really fundamentally change kind of dynamic between business I t and partner, right, to to deliver on a specific business. All >>right, I love that. That's a great That's a great summary and in fact, getting ready for this interview. I saw you mentioning another thing where you know the problem with the agile development is that you're actually now getting mawr silos because you have all these autonomous people working you know, kind of independently. So it's even harder challenge for for the business leaders toe, as you said to know what's actually going on. But But, sir, I want to close um, and talk about the coalition eso clearly These are all great concepts, these air concepts. You want to apply to your business every day. Why the coalition? Why, you know, take these concepts out to a broader audience, including your competition and the broader industry to say, Hey, we as a group need to put a stamp of approval on these concepts. These values these principles. It's >>so first, I think we we want everybody to realize that we are all talking about the same things, the same concepts e think we were all from our own different vantage point, realizing that things have to change and again back to you know, whether it's value stream management or site reliability, engineering or biz Opps we're all kind of using slightly different languages on DSO. I think one of the important aspects of these apps is for us, all of us, whether we're talking about consulting actual transformation experts, whether we're talking about vendors right to provide sort of tools and technologies or these larger enterprises to transform for all of us to basically have kind of a reference that lets us speak around kind of in a much more consistent way. The second aspect is for to me is for these concepts to start to be embraced not just by us or trying or vendors, um, system integrators, consulting firms, educators, spot leaders but also for some of our own customers to start to become evangelists of their own in the industry. So we are. Our objective with the coalition is to be pretty, pretty broad, Um, and our hope is by by starting to basically educate our joint customers or our partners that we can start to really foster disbelievers and and start to really change some of dynamics. So we're very pleased that if you look at what some of the companies which have joined the the manifesto eso, we have vendors such as stashed up or advance or pager duty, for instance, or even planned you one of my direct competitors but also fought leaders like Tom Davenport or or Cap Gemini or smaller firms like Business Agility Institute or Agility Elf on DSO our goal really is to start to bring together. For three years, people have bean LP. Large organizations do digital transformation. Vendors were providing the technologies that many of these organizations used to deliver all these digital transformation and for all of us to start to provide the kind of education, support and tools that the industry need. >>That's great search. And, you know, congratulations to you and the team. I know this has been going on for a while putting all this together, getting people to sign onto the manifesto of putting the coalition together and finally today getting to unveil it to the world in a little bit more of a public opportunity. So again, you know, really good values, really simple principles, something that that shouldn't have to be written down. But it's nice because it is. And now you can print it out and stick it on your wall. So thank you for for sharing the story. And again, congrats to you on the team. >>Thank you. Thank you. Appreciate it. >>My pleasure. Alright, He surge If you wanna learn more about the bizarre manifesto goto biz Opps manifesto dot or greed it and you can sign it and you can stay here from or coverage on. The Cube of the bizarre manifesto unveiled. Thanks for watching. See you next time.

>>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage, a BizOps manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with the cube. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the biz ops manifesto. Unveil. Something has been in the works for a little while. Today's the formal unveiling, and we're excited to have three of the core founding members of the manifesto authors of the manifesto. If you will, uh, joining us again, we've had them all on individually. Now we're going to have a great power panel. First up. We're gonna have Mitt Kirsten returning he's the founder and CEO of Tasktop mic. Good to see you again. Where are you dialing in from? >>Great to see you again, Jeff I'm dialing from Vancouver, >>We're Canada, Vancouver, Canada. One of my favorite cities in the whole wide world. Also we've got Tom Davenport come in from across the country. He's a distinguished professor and author from Babson college, Tom. Great to see you. And I think you said you're at a fun, exotic place on the East coast >>Realm of Memphis shoes. That's on Cape Cod. >>Great to see you again and also joining surge Lucio. He is the VP and general manager enterprise software division at Broadcom surge. Great to see you again, where are you coming in from? >>Uh, from Boston right next to Cape Cod. >>Terrific. So welcome back, everybody again. Congratulations on this day. I know it's been a lot of work to get here for this unveil, but let's just jump into it. The biz ops manifesto, what was the initial reason to do this? And how did you decide to do it in a kind of a coalition, a way bringing together a group of people versus just making it an internal company, uh, initiative that, you know, you can do better stuff within your own company, surge, why don't we start with you? >>Yeah, so, so I think we were at a really critical juncture, right? Many, um, large enterprises are basically struggling with their digital transformation. Um, in fact, um, many recognized that, uh, the, the business side, it collaboration has been, uh, one of the major impediments, uh, to drive that kind of transformation. That, and if we look at the industry today, many people are, whether we're talking about vendors or, um, you know, system integrators, consulting firms are talking about the same kind of concepts, but using very different language. And so we believe that bringing all these different players together, um, as part of the coalition and formalizing, uh, basically the core principles and values in a BizOps manifesto, we can really start to F could have a much bigger movement where we can all talk about kind of the same concepts and we can really start to provide, could have a much better support for large organizations to, to transform. Uh, so whether it is technology or services or, um, or training, I think that that's really the value of bringing all of these players together, right. >>And mic to you. Why did you get involved in this, in this effort? >>So I've been closely involved the agile movement since it started two decades with that manifesto. And I think we got a lot of improvement at the team level, and I think that was just no. Did we really need to improve at the business level? Every company is trying to become a software innovator, trying to make sure that they can pivot quickly and the changing market economy and what everyone's dealing with in terms of needing to deliver value to customers sooner. However, agile practices have really focused on these metrics, these measures and understanding processes that help teams be productive. Those things now need to be elevated to the business as a whole. And that just hasn't happened. Uh, organizations are actually failing because they're measuring activities and how they're becoming more agile, how teams are functioning, not how much quickly they're delivering value to the customer. So we need to now move past that. And that's exactly what the manifesto provides. Right, >>Right, right. And Tom, to you, you've been covering tech for a very long time. You've been looking at really hard challenges and a lot of work around analytics and data and data evolution. So there's a definitely a data angle here. I wonder if you could kind of share your perspective of what you got excited to, uh, to sign onto this manifesto. >>Sure. Well, I have, you know, for the past 15 or 20 years, I've been focusing on data and analytics and AI, but before that I was a process management guy and a knowledge management guy. And in general, I think, you know, we've just kind of optimize that to narrow a level, whether you're talking about agile or dev ops or ML ops, any of these kinds of ops oriented movements, we're making individual project, um, performance and productivity better, but we're not changing the business, uh, effectively enough. And that's the thing that appealed to me about the biz ops idea, that we're finally creating a closer connection between what we do with technology and how it changes the business and provides value to it. >>Great. Uh, surge back to you, right? I mean, people have been talking about digital transformation for a long time and it's been, you know, kind of trucking along and then covert hit and it was instant Lightswitch. Everyone's working from home. You've got a lot more reliance on your digital tools, digital communication, uh, both within your customer base and your partner base, but also then your employees when you're, if you could share how that really pushed this all along. Right? Because now suddenly the acceleration of digital transformation is higher. Even more importantly, you got much more critical decisions to make into what you do next. So kind of your portfolio management of projects has been elevated significantly when maybe revenues are down, uh, and you really have to, uh, to prioritize and get it right. >>Yeah. Maybe I'll just start by quoting Satina Nello basically recently said that they're speeding the two years of digital preservation just last two months in any many ways. That's true. Um, but yet when we look at large enterprises, they're still struggling with a kind of a changes in culture. They really need to drive to be able to disrupt themselves. And not surprisingly, you know, when we look at certain parts of the industry, you know, we see some things which are very disturbing, right? So about 40% of the personal loans today are being, uh, origin data it's by fintechs, uh, of a like of Sophie or, uh, or a lending club, right? Not to a traditional brick and mortar for BEC. And so the, well, there is kind of a much more of an appetite and it's a, it's more of a survival type of driver these days. >>Uh, the reality is that's in order for these large enterprises to truly transform and engage on this digital transformation, they need to start to really align the business nightie, you know, in many ways and make cover. Does agile really emerge from the core desire to truly improve software predictability between which we've really missed is all the way we start to aligning the software predictability to business predictability, and to be able to have continual sleep continuous improvement and measurement of business outcomes. So by aligning that of these, uh, discuss inward metrics, that's, it is typically being using to business outcomes. We think we can start to really ELP, uh, different stakeholders within the organization to collaborate. So I think there is more than ever. There's an imperative to acts now. Um, and, and resolves, I think is kind of the right approach to drive that kind of transformation. Right. >>I want to follow up on the culture comment, uh, with you, Tom, because you've talked before about kind of process flow and process flow throughout a whore and an organization. And, you know, we talk about people process and tech all the time. And I think the tech is the easy part compared to actually changing the people the way they think. And then the actual processes that they put in place. It's a much more difficult issue than just the tech issue to get this digital transformation in your organization. >>Yeah. You know, I've always found that the soft stuff about, you know, the culture of a behavior, the values is the hard stuff to change and more and more, we, we realized that to be successful with any kind of digital transformation you have to change people's behaviors and attitudes. Um, we haven't made as much progress in that area as we might have. I mean, I've done some surveys suggesting that most organizations still don't have data driven cultures. And in many cases there is a lower percentage of companies that say they have that then, um, did a few years ago. So we're kind of moving in the wrong direction, which means I think that we have to start explicitly addressing that, um, cultural, behavioral dimension and not just assuming that it will happen if we, if we build system, if we build it, they won't necessarily come. Right. >>Right. So I want to go to you Nick. Cause you know, we're talking about workflows and flow, um, and, and you've written about flow both in terms of, um, you know, moving things along a process and trying to find bottlenecks, identify bottlenecks, which is now even more important again, when these decisions are much more critical. Cause you have a lot less, uh, wiggle room in tough times, but you also talked about flow from the culture side and the people side. So I wonder if you can just share your thoughts on, you know, using flow as a way to think about things, to get the answers better. >>Yeah, absolutely. And I'll refer back to what Tom has said. If you're optimized, you need to optimize your system. You need to optimize how you innovate and how you deliver value to the business and the customer. Now, what we've noticed in the data, since that we've learned from customers, value streams, enterprise organizations, value streams, is that when it's taking six months at the end to deliver that value with the flow is that slow. You've got a bunch of unhappy developers, unhappy customers when you're innovating half so high performing organizations, we can measure third and 10 float time and dates. All of a sudden that feedback loop, the satisfaction your developer's measurably goes up. So not only do you have people context, switching glass, you're delivering so much more value to customers at a lower cost because you've optimized for flow rather than optimizing for these other approximate tricks that we use, which is how efficient is my agile team. How quickly can we deploy software? Those are important, but they do not provide the value of agility of fast learning of adaptability to the business. And that's exactly what the biz ops manifesto pushes your organization to do. You need to put in place this new operating model that's based on flow on the delivery of business value and on bringing value to market much more quickly than you were before. Right. >>I love that. And I'm going back to you, Tom, on that to follow up. Cause I think, I don't think people think enough about how they prioritize what they're optimizing for. Cause you know, if you're optimizing for a versus B, you know, you can have a very different product that you kick out and let you know. My favorite example is with Clayton Christianson and innovator's dilemma talking about the three inch hard drive. If you optimize it for power, you know, is one thing, if you optimize it for vibration is another thing and sure enough, you know, they missed it on the poem because it was the, it was the game console, which, which drove that whole business. So when you, when you're talking to customers and we think we hear it with cloud all the time, people optimizing for cost efficiency, instead of thinking about it as an innovation tool, how do you help them kind of rethink and really, you know, force them to, to look at the, at the prioritization and make sure they're prioritizing on the right thing is make just said, what are you optimizing for? >>Oh yeah. Um, you have one of the most important aspects of any decision or, um, attempt to resolve a problem in an organization is the framing process. And, um, you know, it's, it's a difficult aspect of the decision to frame it correctly in the first place. Um, there, it's not a technology issue. In many cases, it's largely a human issue, but if you frame that decision or that problem incorrectly to narrowly say, or you frame it as an either or situation where you could actually have some of both, um, it, it's very difficult for the, um, process to work out correctly. So in many cases that I think we need to think more at the beginning about how we bring this issue or this decision in the best way possible before we charge off and build a system to support it. You know, um, it's worth that extra time to think, think carefully about how the decision has been structured, right >>Surgery. I want to go back to you and talk about the human factors because as we just discussed, you can put it in great technology, but if the culture doesn't adopt it and people don't feel good about it, you know, it's not going to be successful and that's going to reflect poorly on the technology, even if it had nothing to do with it. And you know, when you look at the, the, the core values, uh, of the Bezos manifesto, you know, a big one is trust and collaboration, you know, learn, respond and pivot. I wonder if you can share your thoughts on, on trying to get that cultural shift, uh, so that you can have success with the people or excuse me, with the technology in the process and helping customers, you know, take this more trustworthy and kind of proactive, uh, position. >>So I think, I think at the ground level, it truly starts with the realization that we're all different. We come from different backgrounds. Um, oftentimes we tend to blame the data. It's not uncommon my experiments that we spend the first 30 minutes of any kind of one hour conversation to debate the validity of the data. Um, and so, um, one of the first kind of, uh, probably manifestations that we've had or revelations as we start to engage with our customers is spike, just exposing, uh, high-fidelity data sets to different stakeholders from their different lens. We start to enable these different stakeholders to not debate the data. That's really collaborate to find a solution. So in many ways, when, when, when we think about kind of the types of changes we're trying to, to truly affect around data driven decision making, it's all about bringing the data in context, in the context that is relevant and understandable for, for different stakeholders, whether we're talking about an operator or develop for a business analyst. >>So that's, that's the first thing. The second layer I think, is really to provide context to what people are doing in their specific cycle. And so I think one of the best examples I have is if you start to be able to align business KPI, whether you are counting, you know, sales per hour, or the engagements of your users on your mobile applications, whatever it is, you can start to connect that PKI to the business KPI, to the KPIs that developers might be looking at, whether it is the number of defects or a velocity or whatever, you know, metrics that they are used to to actually track you start to, to be able to actually contextualize in what we are the effecting, basically a metric that is really relevant in which we see is that DC is a much more systematic way to approach the transformation than say, you know, some organizations kind of creating, uh, some of these new products or services or initiatives, um, to, to drive engagements, right? >>So if you look at zoom, for instance, zoom giving away a it service to, uh, to education, he's all about, I mean, there's obviously a marketing aspect in therapists. It's fundamentally about trying to drive also the engagement of their own teams. And because now they're doing something for good and the organizations are trying to do that, but you only can do this kind of things in a limited way. And so you really want to start to rethink how you connect to, everybody's kind of a business objective fruit data, and now you start to get people to stare at the same data from their own lens and collaborate on all the data. Right, >>Right. That's a good, uh, Tom, I want to go back to you. You've been studying it for a long time, writing lots of books and getting into it. Um, why now, you know, what w why now are we finally aligning business objectives with, with it objectives? You know, why didn't this happen before? And, you know, what are the factors that are making now the time for this, this, this move with the, uh, with the biz ops? >>Well, and much of the past, it was sort of a back office related activity. And, you know, it was important for, um, uh, producing your paychecks and, uh, um, capturing the customer orders, but the business wasn't built around it now, every organization needs to be a software business, a data business, a digital business, the auntie has been raised considerably. And if you aren't making that connection between your business objectives and the technology that supports it, you run a pretty big risk of, you know, going out of business or losing out to competitors. Totally. So, um, and, uh, even if you're in a, an industry that hasn't historically been terribly, um, technology oriented customer expectations flow from, uh, you know, the digital native, um, companies that they work with to basically every industry. So you're compared against the best in the world. So we don't really have the luxury anymore of screwing up our it projects or building things that don't really work for the business. Um, it's mission critical that we do that well. Um, almost every time, I just want to follow up by that, Tom, >>In terms of the, you've talked extensively about kind of these evolutions of data and analytics from artismal stage to the big data stage, the data economy stage, the AI driven stage and what I find diff interesting that all those stages, you always put a start date. You never put an end date. Um, so you know, is the, is the big data I'm just going to use that generically a moment in time finally here, where we're, you know, off mahogany row with the data scientists, but actually can start to see the promise of delivering the right insight to the right person at the right time to make that decision. >>Well, I think it is true that in general, these previous stages never seemed to go away. The, um, the artisinal stuff is still being done, but we would like for less than less of it to be artisinal, we can't really afford for everything to be artisinal anymore. It's too labor and time consuming to do things that way. So we shift more and more of it to be done through automation and B to be done with a higher level of productivity. And, um, you know, at some point maybe we reached the stage where we don't do anything artisanally anymore. I'm not sure we're there yet, but, you know, we are, we are making progress. Right, >>Right. And Mick, back to you in terms of looking at agile, cause you're, you're such a, a student of agile when, when you look at the opportunity with ops, um, and taking the lessons from agile, you know, what's been the inhibitor to stop this in the past. And what are you so excited about? You know, taking this approach will enable. >>Yeah. I think both Sergeant Tom hit on this is that in agile what's happened is that we've been measuring tiny subsets of the value stream, right? We need to elevate the data's there. Developers are working on these tools that delivering features that the foundations for, for great culture are there. I spent two decades as a developer. And when I was really happy is when I was able to deliver value to customers, the quicker I was able to do that the fewer impediments are in my way, that quicker was deployed and running in the cloud, the happier I was, and that's exactly what's happening. If we can just get the right data, uh, elevated to the business, not just to the agile teams, but really these values of ours are to make sure that you've got these data driven decisions with meaningful data that's oriented around delivering value to customers. Not only these legacies that Tom touched on, which has cost center metrics from an ITK, from where, for it being a cost center and something that provided email and then back office systems. So we need to rapidly shift to those new, meaningful metrics that are customized business centric and make sure that every development the organization is focused on those as well as the business itself, that we're measuring value and that we're helping that value flow without interruptions. >>I love that mic. Cause if you don't measure it, you can't improve on it and you gotta, but you gotta be measuring the right thing. So gentlemen, uh, thank you again for, for your time. Congratulations on the, uh, on the unveil of the biz ops manifesto and together this coalition >>Of, of, uh, industry experts to get behind this. And, you know, there's probably never been a more important time than now to make sure that your prioritization is in the right spot and you're not wasting resources where you're not going to get the ROI. So, uh, congratulations again. And thank you for sharing your thoughts with us here on the cube. Alright, so we had surge, Tom and Mick I'm. Jeff, you're watching the cube, it's a biz ops manifesto and unveil. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of BizOps manifesto, unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition and welcome back Friday, Jeff Frick here with the cube we're in our Palo Alto studios. And we'd like to welcome you back to our continuing coverage of biz ops manifesto, unveil exciting day to really, uh, kind of bring this out into public. There's been a little bit of conversation, but today's really the official unveiling and we're excited to have our next guest to share a little bit more information on it. He's Patrick tickle. He's a chief product officer for planned view. Patrick. Great to see you. Yeah, it's great to be here. Thanks for the invite. So why the biz ops manifesto, why the biz optical edition now when you guys have been at it, it's relatively mature marketplace businesses. Good. What was missing? Why, why this, uh, why this coalition? >>Yeah, so, you know, again, why is, why is biz ops important and why is this something I'm, you know, I'm so excited about, but I think companies as well, right. Well, you know, in some ways or another, this is a topic that I've been talking to, you know, the market and our customers about for a long time. And it's, you know, I really applaud, you know, this whole movement, right. And, um, in resonates with me, because I think one of the fundamental flaws, frankly, of the way we've talked about technology and business literally for decades, uh, has been this idea of, uh, alignment. Those who know me, I occasionally get off on this little rant about the word alignment, right. But to me, the word alignment is, is actually indicative of the, of the, of the flaw in a lot of our organizations and biz ops is really, I think now trying to catalyze and expose that flaw. >>Right. Because, you know, I always say that, you know, you know, alignment implies silos, right. Instantaneously, as soon as you say there's alignment, there's, there's obviously somebody who's got a direction and other people that have to line up and that, that kind of siloed, uh, nature of organizations. And then frankly, the passive nature of it. Right. I think so many technology organizations are like, look, the business has the strategy you guys need to align. Right. And, and, you know, as a product leader, right. That's where I've been my whole career. Right. I can tell you that I never sit around. I almost never use the word alignment. Right. I mean, whether I never sit down and say, you know, the product management team has to get aligned with Deb, right. Or the dev team has to get aligned with the delivery and ops teams. I mean, what I say is, you know, are we on strategy, right? >>Like we've, we have a strategy as a, as a full end to end value stream. Right. And that there's no silos. And I mean, look, every on any given day we got to get better. Right. But the context, the context we operate is not about alignment. Right. It's about being on strategy. And I think I've talked to customers a lot about that, but when I first read the manifesto, I was like, Oh yeah, this is exactly. This is breaking down. Maybe trying to eliminate the word alignment, you know, from a lot of our organizations, because we literally start thinking about one strategy and how we go from strategy to delivery and have it be our strategy, not someone else's that we're all aligning to it. And it's a great way to catalyze that conversation. That I've, it's been in my mind for years, to be honest. Right. >>So, so much to unpack there. One of the things obviously, uh, stealing a lot from, from dev ops and the dev ops manifesto from 20 years ago. And as I look through some of the principles and I looked through some of the values, which are, you know, really nicely laid out here, you know, satisfy customers, do continuous delivery, uh, measure, output against real results. Um, the ones that, that jumps out though is really about, you know, change, change, right? Requirements should change frequently. They do change frequently, but I'm curious to get your take from a, from a software development point, it's easy to kind of understand, right. We're making this widget and our competitors, beta widget plus X, and now we need to change our plans and make sure that the plus X gets added to the plan. Maybe it wasn't in the plan, but you talked a lot about product strategy. So in this kind of continuous delivery world, how does that meld with, I'm actually trying to set a strategy, which implies the direction for a little bit further out on the horizon and to stay on that while at the same time, you're kind of doing this real time continual adjustments. Cause you're not working off a giant PRD or MRD anymore. >>Yeah, yeah, totally. Yeah. You know, one of the terms, you know, that we use internally a lot and even with my customers, our customers is we talked about this idea of rewiring, right. And I think, you know, it's kind of a, now an analogy for transformation. And I think a lot of us have to rewire the way we think about things. Right. And I think at Planview where we have a lot of customers who live in that, you know, who operationalize that traditional PPM world. Right. And are shifting to agile and transforming that rewire is super important. And, and to your point, right, it's, you've just, you've got to embrace this idea of, you know, just iterative getting better every day and iterating, iterating, iterating as to building annual plans or, you know, I get customers occasionally who asked me for two or three year roadmap. >>Right. And I literally looked at them and I go, there's no, there's no scenario where I can build a two or three year roadmap. Right. You, you, you think you want that, but that's not, that's not the way we run. Right. And I will tell you the biggest thing that for us, you know, that I think is matched the planning, uh, you know, patents is a word I like to use a lot. So the thing that we've like, uh, that we've done from a planning perspective, I think is matched impedance to continuous delivery is instituting the whole program, implement, you know, the program, increment planning, capabilities and methodologies, um, in the scaled agile world. Right. And over the last 18 months to two years, we really have now, you know, instrumented our company across three value streams. You know, we do quarterly PI program increment 10 week planning, you know, and that becomes, that becomes the Terra firma of how we plant. >>Right. And it's, what are we doing for the next 10 weeks? And we iterate within those 10 weeks, but we also know that 10 weeks from now, we're going to, we're going to adjust iterate again. Right. And that shifting of that planning model, you know, to being as cross-functional is that as that big room planning kind of model is, um, and also, uh, you know, on that shorter increment, when you get those two things in place, all sudden the impedance really starts to match up, uh, with continuous delivery and it changes, it changes the way you plan and it changes the way you work. Right? >>Yeah. Their thing. Right. So obviously a lot of these things are kind of process driven, both within the values, as well as the principles, but there's a whole lot, really about culture. And I just want to highlight a couple of the values, right? We already talked about business outcomes, um, trust and collaboration, uh, data driven decisions, and then learn, respond and pivot. Right. A lot of those are cultural as much as they are process. So again, is it the, is it the need to really kind of just put them down on paper and you know, I can't help, but think of, you know, the hammering up the, uh, the thing in the Lutheran church with their, with their manifesto, is it just good to get it down on paper? Because when you read these things, you're like, well, of course we should trust people. And of course we need an environment of collaboration and of course we want data driven decisions, but as we all know saying it and living, it are two very, very different things. >>Yeah. Good question. I mean, I think there's a lot of ways you bring that to life you're right. And just hanging up, you know, I think we've all been through the hanging up posters around your office, which these days, right. Unless you're going to hang a poster and everybody's home office. Right. You can't even, you can't even fake it that you think that might work. Right. So, um, you know, you really, I think we've attacked that in a variety of ways. Right. And you definitely have to, you know, you've got to make the shift to a team centric culture, right. Empowered teams, you know, that's a big deal. Right. You know, a lot of, a lot of the people that, you know, we lived in a world of quote unquote, where we were lived in a deep resource management world for a long, long time. >>And right. A lot of our customers still do that, but you know, kind of moving to that team centric world is, uh, is really important and core the trust. Um, I think training is super important, right. We've, you know, we've internally, right. We've trained hundreds employees over the last a year and a half on the fundamentals really of safe. Right. Not necessarily, you know, we've had, we've had teams delivering in scrum and the continuous delivery for, you know, for years, but the scaling aspect of it, uh, is where we've done a lot of training and investment. Um, and then, you know, I think, uh, leadership has to be bought in. Right. You know? And so when we pie plan, you know, myself and Cameron and the other members of our leadership, you know, we're NPI planning, you know, for, for four days. Right. I mean, it's, it's, you've got to walk the walk, you know, from top to bottom and you've got to train on the context. Right. And then you, and then, and, and then once you get through a few cycles where you've done a pivot, right. Or you brought a new team in, and it just works, it becomes kind of this virtuous circle where he'll go, man, this really works so much better than what we used to do. Right. >>Right. The other really key principle to this whole thing is, is aligning, you know, the business leaders and the business prioritization, um, so that you can get to good outcomes with the development and the delivery. Right. And we, we know again, and kind of classic dev ops to get the dev and the production people together. So they can, you know, quickly ship code that works. Um, but adding the business person on there really puts, puts a little extra responsibility that they, they understand the value of a particular feature or particular priority. Uh, they, they can make the, the, the trade offs and that they kind of understand the effort involved too. So, you know, bringing them into this continuous again, kind of this continuous development process, um, to make sure that things are better aligned and really better prioritize. Cause ultimately, you know, we don't live in an infinite resources situation and people got to make trade offs. They got to make decisions as to what goes and what doesn't go in for everything that goes. Right. I always say you pick one thing. Okay. That's 99 other things that couldn't go. So it's really important to have, you know, this, you said alignment of the business priorities as well as, you know, the execution within, within the development. >>Yeah. I think that, you know, uh, you know, I think it was probably close to two years ago. Forester started talking about the age of the customer, right. That, that was like their big theme at the time. Right. And I think to me what that, the age of the customer actually translates to and Mick, Mick and I are both big fans of this whole idea of the project and product shift, mixed book, you know, it was a great piece on a, you're talking about, you know, as part of the manifesto is one of the authors as well, but this shift from project to product, right? Like the age of the customer, in my opinion, the, the embodiment of that is the shift to a product mentality. Right. And, and the product mentality in my opinion, is what brings the business and technology teams together, right? >>Once you, once you're focused on a customer experience is delivered through a product or a service. That's when I that's, when I started to go with the alignment problem goes away, right. Because if you look at software companies, right, I mean, we run product management models yeah. With software development teams, customer success teams, right. That, you know, the software component of these products that people are building is obviously becoming bigger and bigger, you know, in an, in many ways, right. More and more organizations are trying to model themselves over as operationally like software companies. Right. Um, they obviously have lots of other components in their business than just software, but I think that whole model of customer experience equaling product, and then the software component of product, the product is the essence of what changes that alignment equation and brings business and teams together because all of a sudden, everyone knows what the customer's experiencing. Right. And, and that, that, that makes a lot of things very clear, very quickly. >>Right. I'm just curious how far along this was as a process before, before COBIT hit, right. Because serendipitous, whatever. Right. But the sudden, you know, light switch moment, everybody had to go work from home and in March 15th compared to now we're in October and this is going to be going on for a while. And it is a new normal and whatever that whatever's going to look like a year from now, or two years from now is TBD, you know, had you guys already started on this journey cause again, to sit down and actually declare this coalition and declare this manifesto is a lot different than just trying to do better within your own organization. >>Yeah. So we had started, uh, you know, w we definitely had started independently, you know, some, some, you know, I think people in the community know that, uh, we, we came together with a company called lean kit a handful of years ago, and I give John Terry actually one of the founders LeanKit immense credit for, you know, kind of spearheading our cultural change and not, and not because of, we were just gonna be, you know, bringing agile solutions to our customers, but because, you know, he believed that it was going to be a fundamentally better way for us to work. Right. And we kind of, you know, we started with John and built, you know, out of concentric circles of momentum and, and we've gotten to the place where now it's just part of who we are, but, but I do think that, you know, COVID has, you know, um, I think pre COVID a lot of companies, you know, would, would adopt, you know, the would adopt digital slash agile transformation. >>Um, traditional industries may have done it as a reaction to disruption. Right. You know, and in many cases, the disruption to these traditional industries was, I would say a product oriented company, right. That probably had a larger software component, and that disruption caused a competitive issue, uh, or a customer issue that caused companies and tried to respond by transforming. I think COVID, you know, all of a sudden flatten that out, right. We literally all got disrupted. Right. And so all of a sudden, every one of us is dealing with some degree of market uncertainty, customer uncertainty, uh, and also, you know, none of us were insulated from the need to be able to pivot faster, deliver incrementally, you know, and operate in a different, completely more agile way, uh, you know, post COVID. Right. Yeah. That's great. >>So again, a very, very, very timely, you know, a little bit of serendipity, a little bit of planning. And, you know, as, as with all important things, there's always a little bit of lock in, uh, and a lot of hard work involved. So a really interesting thank you for, for your leadership, Patrick. And, you know, it really makes a statement. I think when you have a bunch of leaderships across an industry coming together and putting their name on a piece of paper, uh, that's aligned around us some principles and some values, which again, if you read them who wouldn't want to get behind these, but if it takes, you know, something a little bit more formal, uh, to kind of move the ball down the field, and then I totally get it and a really great work. Thanks for, uh, thanks for doing it. >>Oh, absolutely. No. Like I said, the first time I read it, I was like, yep. Like you said, this is all, it's all makes complete sense, but just documenting it and saying it and talking about it moves the needle. I'll tell you as a company, you gotta, we're pushing really hard on, uh, you know, on our own internal strategy on diversity and inclusion. Right. And, and like, once we wrote the words down about what, you know, what we aspire to be from a diversity and inclusion perspective, it's the same thing. Everybody reads the words that goes, why wouldn't we do this? Right. But until you write it down and kind of have again, a manifesto or a Terra firma of what you're trying to accomplish, you know, then you can rally behind it. Right. As opposed to it being something that's, everybody's got their own version of the flavor. Right. And I think it's a very analogous, you know, kind of, uh, initiative. Right. And, uh, and it's happening, both of those things right. Are happening across the industry these days. Right. >>And measure it too. Right. And measure it, measure, measure, measure, get a baseline. Even if you don't like to measure, even if you don't like what the, even if you can argue against the math, behind the measurement, measure it. And at least you can measure it again and you can, and you've got some type of a comp and that is really the only way to, to move it forward. We're Patrick really enjoyed the conversation. Thanks for, uh, for taking a few minutes out of your day. >>It's great to be here. It's an awesome movement and we're glad to be a part of it. >>All right. Thanks. And if you want to check out the biz ops, Manifesta go to biz ops, manifesto.org, read it. You might want to sign it. It's there for you. And thanks for tuning in on this segment will continuing coverage of the biz op manifesto unveil you're on the cube. I'm Jeff, thanks for watching >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of biz ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back, everybody Jeffrey here with the cube. We're coming to you from our Palo Alto studios. And welcome back to this event is the biz ops manifesto unveiling. So the biz ops manifesto and the biz ops coalition had been around for a little while, but today's the big day. That's kind of the big public unveiling, or we're excited to have some of the foundational people that, you know, have put their, put their name on the dotted, if you will, to support this initiative and talk about why that initiative is so important. And so the next guest we're excited to have is dr. Mick Kirsten. He is the founder and CEO of Tasktop mic. Great to see you coming in from Vancouver, Canada, I think, right? Yes. Great to be here, Jeff. Thank you. Absolutely. I hope your air is a little better out there. I know you had some of the worst air of all of us, a couple, a couple of weeks back. So hopefully things are, uh, are getting a little better and we get those fires under control. Yeah. >>Things have cleared up now. So yeah, it's good. It's good to be close to the U S and it's going to have the Arabic cleaner as well. >>Absolutely. So let's, let's jump into it. So you you've been an innovation guy forever starting way back in the day and Xerox park. I was so excited to do an event at Xerox park for the first time last year. I mean, that, that to me represents along with bell labs and, and some other, you know, kind of foundational innovation and technology centers, that's gotta be one of the greatest ones. So I just wonder if you could share some perspective of getting your start there at Xerox park, you know, some of the lessons you learned and what you've been able to kind of carry forward from those days. >>Yeah. I was fortunate to join Xerox park in the computer science lab there at a fairly early point in my career, and to be working on open source programming languages. So back then in the computer science lab, where some of the inventions around programming around software development games, such as object programming, and a lot of what we had around really modern programming levels constructs, those were the teams I had the fortunate of working with, and really our goal was. And of course, there's, as, as you noticed, there's just this DNA of innovation and excitement and innovation in the water. And really it was the model that was all about changing the way that we work was looking at for how we can make it 10 times easier to white coat. But this is back in 99. And we were looking at new ways of expressing, especially business concerns, especially ways of enabling people who are wanting to innovate for their business to express those concerns in code and make that 10 times easier than what that would take. >>So we create a new open source programming language, and we saw some benefits, but not quite quite what we expected. I then went and actually joined Charles Stephanie, that former to fucking from Microsoft who was responsible for, he actually got Microsoft word as a sparking into Microsoft and into the hands of bill Gates and that company that was behind the whole office suite and his vision. And then when I was trying to execute with, working for him was to make PowerPoint like a programming language to make everything completely visual. And I realized none of this was really working, that there was something else, fundamentally wrong programming languages, or new ways of building software. Like let's try and do with Charles around intentional programming. That was not enough. >>That was not enough. So, you know, the agile movement got started about 20 years ago, and we've seen the rise of dev ops and really this kind of embracing of, of, of sprints and, you know, getting away from MRDs and PRDs and these massive definitions of what we're going to build and long build cycles to this iterative process. And this has been going on for a little while. So what was still wrong? What was still missing? Why the biz ops coalition, why the biz ops manifesto? >>Yeah, so I basically think we nailed some of the things that the program language levels of teams can have effective languages deployed to soften to the cloud easily now, right? And at the kind of process and collaboration and planning level agile two decades, decades ago was formed. We were adopting and all the, all the teams I was involved with and it's really become a self problem. So agile tools, agile teams, agile ways of planning, uh, are now very mature. And the whole challenge is when organizations try to scale that. And so what I realized is that the way that agile was scaling across teams and really scaling from the technology part of the organization to the business was just completely flawed. The agile teams had one set of doing things, one set of metrics, one set of tools. And the way that the business was working was planning was investing in technology was just completely disconnected and using a whole different set of measures. Pretty >>Interesting. Cause I think it's pretty clear from the software development teams in terms of what they're trying to deliver. Cause they've got a feature set, right. And they've got bugs and it's easy to, it's easy to see what they deliver, but it sounds like what you're really honing in on is this disconnect on the business side, in terms of, you know, is it the right investment? You know, are we getting the right business ROI on this investment? Was that the right feature? Should we be building another feature or should we building a completely different product set? So it sounds like it's really a core piece of this is to get the right measurement tools, the right measurement data sets so that you can make the right decisions in terms of what you're investing, you know, limited resources. You can't, nobody has unlimited resources. And ultimately you have to decide what to do, which means you're also deciding what not to do. And it sounds like that's a really big piece of this, of this whole effort. >>Yeah. Jeff, that's exactly it, which is the way that the agile team measures their own way of working is very different from the way that you measure business outcomes. The business outcomes are in terms of how happy your customers are, but are you innovating fast enough to keep up with the pace of a rapidly changing economy, roughly changing market. And those are, those are all around the customer. And so what I learned on this long journey of supporting many organizations transformations and having them try to apply those principles of agile and dev ops, that those are not enough, those measures technical practices, uh, those measured sort of technical excellence of bringing code to the market. They don't actually measure business outcomes. And so I realized that it really was much more around having these entwined flow metrics that are customer centric and business centric and market centric where we need it to go. Right. >>So I want to shift gears a little bit and talk about your book because you're also a bestselling author from project to product and, and, and you, you brought up this concept in your book called the flow framework. And it's really interesting to me cause I know, you know, flow on one hand is kind of a workflow and a process flow and, and you know, that's how things get done and, and, and embrace the flow. On the other hand, you know, everyone now in, in a little higher level existential way is trying to get into the flow right into the workflow and, you know, not be interrupted and get into a state where you're kind of at your highest productivity, you know, kind of your highest comfort, which flow are you talking about in your book? Or is it a little bit of both? >>That's a great question. It's not one I get asked very often cause to me it's absolutely both. So that the thing that we want to get, that we've learned how to master individual flow, that there's this beautiful book by me, how you teaches me how he does a beautiful Ted talk by him as well about how we can take control of our own flow. So my question with the book with question replies, how can we bring that to entire teams and really entire organizations? How can we have everyone contributing to a customer outcome? And this is really what if you go to the biz ops manifesto, it says, I focus on outcomes on using data to drive whether we're delivering those outcomes rather than a focus on proxy metrics, such as, how quickly did we implement this feature? No, it's really how much value did the customer go to the future? >>And how quickly did you learn and how quickly did you use that data to drive to that next outcome? Really that with companies like Netflix and Amazon have mastered, how do we get that to every large organization, every it organization and make everyone be a software innovator. So it's to bring that, that concept of flow to these end to end value streams. And the fascinating thing is we've actually seen the data. We've been able to study a lot of value streams. We see when flow increases, when organizations deliver value to a customer faster, developers actually become more happy. So things like that and point out promoter scores, rise, and we've got empirical data for this. So that the beautiful thing to me is that we've actually been able to combine these two things and see the results and the data that you increase flow to the customer. Your developers are more, >>I love it. I love it, right, because we're all more, we're all happier when we're in the flow and we're all more productive when we're in the flow. So I, that is a great melding of, of two concepts, but let's jump into the, into the manifesto itself a little bit. And you know, I love that you took this approach really of having kind of four key values and then he gets 12 key principles. And I just want to read a couple of these values because when you read them, it sounds pretty brain dead. Right? Of course. Right. Of course you should focus on business outcomes. Of course you should have trust and collaboration. Of course you should have database decision making processes and not just intuition or, you know, whoever's the loudest person in the room, uh, and to learn and respond and pivot. But what's the value of actually just putting them on a piece of paper, because again, this is not this, these are all good, positive things, right? When somebody reads these to you or tells you these are sticks it on the wall, of course. But unfortunately of course isn't always enough. >>No. And I think what's happened is some of these core principles originally from the agile manifesto in two decades ago, uh, the whole dev ops movement of the last decade of flow feedback and continue learning has been key. But a lot of organizations, especially the ones undergoing digital transformations have actually gone a very different way, right? The way that they measure value, uh, in technology and innovation is through costs for many organizations. The way that they actually are looking at that they're moving to cloud is actually as a reduction in cost. Whereas the right way of looking at moving to cloud is how much more quickly can we get to the value to the customer? How quickly can we learn from that? And how quickly can we drive the next business outcome? So really the key thing is, is to move away from those old ways of doing things of funding projects and cost centers, to actually funding and investing in outcomes and measuring outcomes through these flow metrics, which in the end are your fast feedback and how quickly you're innovating for your customer. >>So these things do seem very obvious when you look at them. But the key thing is what you need to stop doing to focus on these. You need to actually have accurate realtime data of how much value you fund to the customer every week, every month, every quarter. And if you don't have that, your decisions are not driven on data. If you don't know what your bottleneck is. And this is something that in decades of manufacturing, a car manufacturers, other manufacturers, master, they always know where the bottom back in their production processes. You ask a random CIO when a global 500 company where their bottleneck is, and you won't get a clear answer because there's not that level of understanding. So have to actually follow these principles. You need to know exactly where you fall. And I guess because that's, what's making your developers miserable and frustrated, then having them context, which I'm trash. So the approach here is important and we have to stop doing these other things, >>Right? There's so much there to unpack. I love it. You know, especially the cloud conversation because so many people look at it wrong as, as, as a cost saving a device, as opposed to an innovation driver and they get stuck, they get stuck in the literal. And I, you know, I think at the same thing, always about Moore's law, right? You know, there's a lot of interesting real tech around Moore's law and the increasing power of microprocessors, but the real power, I think in Moore's laws is the attitudinal change in terms of working in a world where you know that you've got all this power and what you build and design. I think it's funny to your, your comment on the flow and the bottleneck, right? Cause, cause we know manufacturing, as soon as you fix one bottleneck, you move to your next one, right? You always move to your next point of failure. So if you're not fixing those things, you know, you're not, you're not increasing that speed down the line, unless you can identify where that bottleneck is or no matter how many improvements you make to the rest of the process, it's still going to get hung up on that one spot. >>That's exactly it. And you also make it sound so simple, but again, if you don't have the data driven visibility of where the bottom line is, and these bottlenecks are adjusted to say, it's just whack-a-mole right. So we need to understand is the bottleneck because our security reviews are taking too long and stopping us from getting value for the customer. If it's that automate that process. And then you move on to the next bottleneck, which might actually be that deploying yourself into the cloud was taking too long. But if you don't take that approach of going flow first, rather than again, that sort of cost reduction. First, you have to think of that approach of customer centricity and you only focused on optimizing costs. Your costs will increase and your flow will slow down. And this is just one of these fascinating things. Whereas if you focus on getting back to the customer and reducing your cycles on getting value, your flow time from six months to two weeks or two, one week or two event, as we see with, with tech giants, you actually can both lower your costs and get much more value that for us to get that learning loop going. >>So I think I've seen all of these cloud deployments and one of the things that's happened that delivered almost no value because there was such big bottlenecks upfront in the process and actually the hosting and the AP testing was not even possible with all of those inefficiencies. So that's why going float for us rather than costs where we started our project versus silky. >>I love that. And, and, and, and it, it begs repeating to that right within the subscription economy, you know, you're on the hook to deliver value every single month because they're paying you every single month. So if you're not on top of how you're delivering value, you're going to get sideways because it's not like, you know, they pay a big down payment and a small maintenance fee every month, but once you're in a subscription relationship, you know, you have to constantly be delivering value and upgrading that value because you're constantly taking money from the customer. So it's such a different kind of relationship than kind of the classic, you know, big bang with a maintenance agreement on the back end really important. Yeah. >>And I think in terms of industry shifts that that's it that's, what's catalyzed. This interesting shift is in this SAS and subscription economy. If you're not delivering more and more value to your customers, someone else's and they're winning the business, not you. So one way we know is to delight our customers with great user experiences. Well, that really is based on how many features you delivered or how much, how big, how many quality improvements or scalar performance improvements you delivered. So the problem is, and this is what the business manifesto, as well as the full frame of touch on is if you can't measure how much value you delivered to a customer, what are you measuring? You just backed again, measuring costs and that's not a measure of value. So we have to shift quickly away from measuring cost to measuring value, to survive in the subscription economy. >>We could go for days and days and days. I want to shift gears a little bit into data and, and, and a data driven, um, decision making a data driven organization cause right day has been talked about for a long time, the huge big data meme with, with Hadoop over, over several years and, and data warehouses and data lakes and data oceans and data swamps, and can go on and on and on. It's not that easy to do, right? And at the same time, the proliferation of data is growing exponentially. We're just around the corner from, from IOT and 5g. So now the accumulation of data at machine scale, again, this is going to overwhelm and one of the really interesting principles, uh, that I wanted to call out and get your take right, is today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be augmented by machine learning and artificial intelligence. I wonder if you can, again, you've got some great historical perspective, um, reflect on how hard it is to get the right data, to get the data in the right context, and then to deliver it to the decision makers and then trust the decision makers to actually make the data and move that down. You know, it's kind of this democratization process into more and more people and more and more frontline jobs making more and more of these little decisions every day. >>Yeah. I definitely think the front parts of what you said are where the promises of big data have completely fallen on their face into the swamps as, as you mentioned, because if you don't have the data in the right format, you've cannot connect collected at the right way. You want that way, the right way you can't use human or machine learning effectively. And there've been the number of data warehouses in a typical enterprise organization. And the sheer investment is tremendous, but the amount of intelligence being extracted from those is, is, is a very big problem. So the key thing that I've noticed is that if you can model your value streams, so yes, you understand how you're innovating, how you're measuring the delivery of value and how long that takes. What is your time to value these metrics like full time? You can actually use both the intelligence that you've got around the table and push that down as well, as far as getting to the organization, but you can actually start using that those models to understand and find patterns and detect bottlenecks that might be surprising, right? >>Well, you can detect interesting bottlenecks when you shift to work from home. We detected all sorts of interesting bottlenecks in our own organization that were not intuitive to me that had to do with, you know, more senior people being overloaded and creating bottlenecks where they didn't exist. Whereas we thought we were actually an organization that was very good at working from home because of our open source roots. So that data is highly complex. Software value streams are extremely complicated. And the only way to really get the proper analyst and data is to model it properly and then to leverage these machine learning and AI techniques that we have. But that front part of what you said is where organizations are just extremely immature in what I've seen, where they've got data from all their tools, but not modeled in the right way. Right, right. >>Right. Well, all right. So before I let you go, you know, let's say you get a business leader, he buys in, he reads the manifesto, he signs on the dotted line and he says, Mick, how do I get started? I want to be more aligned with, with the development teams. You know, I'm in a very competitive space. We need to be putting out new software features and engaging with our customers. I want to be more data-driven how do I get started? Well, you know, what's the biggest inhibitor for most people to get started and get some early wins, which we know is always the key to success in any kind of a new initiative. >>Right? So I think you can reach out to us through the website, uh, there's the manifesto, but the key thing is just to get you set up it's to get started and to get the key wins. So take a probably value stream that's mission critical. It could be your new mobile and web experiences or, or part of your cloud modernization platform or your analytics pipeline, but take that and actually apply these principles to it and measure the end to end flow of value. Make sure you have a value metric that everyone is on the same page on the people, on the development teams, the people in leadership all the way up to the CEO. And one of the, what I encourage you to start is actually that content flow time, right? That is the number one metric. That is how you measure it, whether you're getting the benefit of your cloud modernization, that is the one metric that Adrian Cockcroft. When the people I respect tremendously put into his cloud for CEOs, the metric, the one, the one way to measure innovation. So basically take these principles, deploy them on one product value stream, measure, sentiment, flow time, and then you'll actually be well on your path to transforming and to applying the concepts of agile and dev ops all the way to, to the business, to the way >>You're offering model. >>Well, Mick really great tips, really fun to catch up. I look forward to a time when we can actually sit across the table and, and get into this. Cause I just, I just love the perspective and, you know, you're very fortunate to have that foundational, that foundational base coming from Xerox park and they get, you know, it's, it's a very magical place with a magical history. So to, to incorporate that into, continue to spread that well, uh, you know, good for you through the book and through your company. So thanks for sharing your insight with us today. >>Thanks so much for having me, Jeff. >>All right. And go to the biz ops manifesto.org, read it, check it out. If you want to sign it, sign it. They'd love to have you do it. Stay with us for continuing coverage of the unveiling of the business manifesto on the cube. I'm Jeff. Rick. Thanks for watching. See you next time >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of biz ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with the cube come due from our Palo Alto studios today for a big, big reveal. We're excited to be here. It's the biz ops manifesto unveiling a thing's been in the works for awhile and we're excited to have our next guest. One of the, really the powers behind this whole effort. And he's joining us from Boston it's surge, Lucio, the vice president, and general manager enterprise software division at Broadcom surge. Great to see you. >>Hi, good to see you, Jeff. Glad to be here. >>So you've been in this business for a very long time. You've seen a lot of changes in technology. What is the biz ops manifesto? What is this coalition all about? Why do we need this today and in 2020? >>Yeah. So, so I've been in this business for close to 25 years, right? So about 20 years ago, the agile manifesto was created. And the goal of the agile manifesto was really to address the uncertainty around software development and the inability to predict the efforts to build software. And, uh, if you, if you roll that kind of 20 years later, and if you look at the current state of the industry, uh, the product, the project management Institute, estimates that we're wasting about a million dollars, every 20 seconds in digital transformation initiatives that do not deliver on business results. In fact, we were recently served a third of the, uh, a number of executives in partnership with Harvard business review and 77% of those executives think that one of the key challenges that they have is really at the collaboration between business and it, and that that's been kind of a case for, uh, almost 20 years now. >>Um, so the, the, the key challenge we're faced with is really that we need a new approach and many of the players in the industry, including ourselves, I've been using different terms, right? Some are being, are talking about value stream management. Some are talking about software delivery management. If you look at the site, reliability engineering movement, in many ways, it embodies a lot of these kind of concepts and principles. So we believed that it became really imperative for us to crystallize around, could have one concept. And so in many ways, the, uh, the BizOps concept and the business manifesto are bringing together a number of ideas, which have been emerging in the last five years or so, and, and defining the key values and principles to finally help these organizations truly transform and become digital businesses. And so the hope is that by joining our forces and defining public key principles and values, we can help the industry, uh, not just, uh, by, you know, providing them with support, but also, uh, tools and consulting that is required for them to truly achieve the kind of transformation that everybody's seeking. >>Right, right. So COVID now we're six months into it, approximately seven months into it. Um, a lot of pain, a lot of bad stuff still happening. We've got a ways to go, but one of the things that on the positive side, right, and you've seen all the memes and social media is, is a driver of digital transformation and a driver of change. Cause we had this light switch moment in the middle of March and there was no more planning. There was no more conversation. You've suddenly got remote workforces, everybody's working from home and you got to go, right. So the reliance on these tools increases dramatically, but I'm curious, you know, kind of short of, of the beginnings of this effort in short of kind of COVID, which, you know, came along unexpectedly. I mean, what were those inhibitors because we've been making software for a very long time, right? The software development community has, has adopted kind of rapid change and, and iterative, uh, delivery and, and sprints, what was holding back the connection with the business side to make sure that those investments were properly aligned with outcomes. >>Well, so, so you have to understand that it is, is kind of a its own silos. And traditionally it has been treated as a cost center within large organizations and not as a value center. And so as a result could have a traditional dynamic between it and the business is basically one of a kind of supplier up to kind of a business. Um, and you know, if you, if you go back to, uh, I think you'll unmask a few years ago, um, basically at this concept of the machines to build the machines and you went as far as saying that, uh, the machines or the production line is actually the product. So, um, meaning that the core of the innovation is really about, uh, building, could it be engine to deliver on the value? And so in many ways, you know, we have missed on this shift from, um, kind of it becoming this kind of value center within the enterprises. >>And, and he talks about culture. Now, culture is a, is a sum total of beavers. And the reality is that if you look at it, especially in the last decade, uh, we've agile with dev ops with, um, I bring infrastructures, uh, it's, it's way more volatile today than it was 10 years ago. And so the, when you start to look at the velocity of the data, the volume of data, the variety of data to analyze this system, um, it's, it's very challenging for it to actually even understand and optimize its own processes, let alone, um, to actually include business as sort of an integral part of kind of a delivery chain. And so it's both kind of a combination of, of culture, um, which is required as well as tools, right? To be able to start to bring together all these data together, and then given the volume variety of philosophy of the data, uh, we have to apply some core technologies, which have only really, truly emerged in the last five to 10 years around machine learning and analytics. And so it's really kind of a combination of those freaks, which are coming together today to really help organizations kind of get to the next level. Right, >>Right. So let's talk about the manifesto. Let's talk about, uh, the coalition, uh, the BizOps coalition. I just liked that you put down these really simple, you know, kind of straightforward core values. You guys have four core values that you're highlighting, you know, business outcomes, over individual projects and outputs, trust, and collaboration, oversight, load teams, and organizations, data driven decisions, what you just talked about, uh, you know, over opinions and judgment and learned, respond and pivot. I mean, surgery sounds like pretty basic stuff, right? I mean, aren't, isn't everyone working to these values already. And I think he touched on it on culture, right? Trust and collaboration, data driven decisions. I mean, these are fundamental ways that people must run their business today, or the person that's across the street, that's doing it. It's going to knock them out right off their blog. >>Yeah. So that's very true. But, uh, so I'll, I'll mention in our survey, we did, uh, I think about six months ago and it was in partnership with, uh, with, uh, an industry analyst and we serve at a, again, a number of it executives to understand how many we're tracking business outcomes I'm going to do with the software executives. It executives we're tracking business outcomes. And the, there were less than 15% of these executives were actually tracking the outcomes of a software delivery. And you see that every day. Right? So in my own teams, for instance, we've been adopting a lot of these core principles in the last year or so, and we've uncovered that 16% of our resources were basically aligned around initiatives, which are not strategic for us. Um, I take, you know, another example, for instance, one of our customers in the, uh, in the airline industry and Harvard, for instance, that a number of, uh, um, that they had software issues that led to people searching for flights and not returning any kind of availability. >>And yet, um, you know, the, it teams, whether it's operations, software environments were completely oblivious to that because they were completely blindsided to it. And so the connectivity between kind of the inwards metrics that RT is using, whether it's database time, cycle time, or whatever metric we use in it are typically completely divorced from the business metrics. And so at its core, it's really about starting to align the business metrics with what the, the software delivery chain, right? This, uh, the system, which is really a core differentiator for these organizations. It's about connecting those two things and, and starting to, um, infuse some of the agile culture and principles. Um, that's emerged from the software side into the business side. Um, of course the lean movement and other movements have started to change some of these dynamic on the, on the business side. And so I think this, this is the moment where we are starting to see kind of the imperative to transform. Now, you know, Covina obviously has been a key driver for that. The, um, the technology is right to start to be able to weave data together and really kind of, uh, also the cultural shifts, uh, Prue agile through dev ops through, uh, the SRE movement, uh frulein um, business transformation, all these things are coming together and that are really creating kind of the conditions for the BizOps manifesto to exist. >>So, uh, Clayton Christianson, great, uh, Harvard professor innovator's dilemma might still my all time favorite business books, you know, talks about how difficult it is for incumbents to react to, to disruptive change, right? Because they're always working on incremental change because that's what their customers are asking for. And there's a good ROI when you talk about, you know, companies not measuring the right thing. I mean, clearly it has some portion of their budget that has to go to keeping the lights on, right. That that's always the case, but hopefully that's an, an ever decreasing percentage of their total activity. So, you know, what should people be measuring? I mean, what are kind of the new metrics, um, in, in biz ops that drive people to be looking at the right things, measuring the right things and subsequently making the right decisions, investment decisions on whether they should do, you know, move project a along or project B. >>So there, there are only two things, right? So, so I think what you're talking about is portfolio management, investment management, right. And, um, which, which is a key challenge, right? Um, in my own experience, right? Uh, driving strategy or a large scale kind of software organization for years, um, it's very difficult to even get kind of a base data as to who is doing what, uh, um, I mean, some of our largest customers we're engaged with right now are simply trying to get a very simple answer, which is how many people do I have and that specific initiative at any point in time, and just tracking that information is extremely difficult. So, and again, back to a product project management Institute, um, there, they have estimated that on average, it organizations have anywhere between 10 to 20% of their resources focused on initiatives, which are not strategically aligned. >>So, so that's one dimensional portfolio management. I think the key aspect though, that we are, we're really keen on is really around kind of the alignment of a business metrics to the it metrics. Um, so I'll use kind of two simple examples, right? And my background is around quality and I've always believed that the fitness for purpose is really kind of a key, um, uh, philosophy if you will. And so if you start to think about quality as fitness for purpose, you start to look at it from a customer point of view, right. And fitness for purpose for a core banking application or mobile application are different, right? So the definition of a business value that you're trying to achieve is different. Um, and so the, and yeah, if you look at our, it, operations are operating there, we're using kind of a same type of, uh, kind of inward metrics, uh, like a database off time or a cycle time, or what is my point of velocity, right? >>And so the challenge really is this inward facing metrics that it is using, which are divorced from ultimately the outcome. And so, you know, if I'm, if I'm trying to build a poor banking application, my core metric is likely going to be uptight, right? If I'm trying to build a mobile application or maybe your social, a mobile app, it's probably going to be engagement. And so what you want is for everybody across it, to look at these metric and what are the metrics within the software delivery chain, which ultimately contribute to that business metric. And some cases cycle time may be completely irrelevant, right? Again, my core banking app, maybe I don't care about cycle time. And so it's really about aligning those metrics and be able to start to, um, Charles you mentioned, uh, around the, the, um, uh, around the disruption that we see is, or the investors is the dilemma now is really around the fact that many it organizations are essentially applying the same approaches of, for innovation, like for basically scrap work, then they would apply to kind of over more traditional projects. And so, you know, there's been a lot of talk about two-speed it, and yes, it exists, but in reality are really organizations, um, truly differentiating, um, all of the operate, their, their projects and products based on the outcomes that they're trying to achieve. And this is really where BizOps is trying to affect. >>I love that, you know, again, it doesn't seem like brain surgery, but focus on the outcomes, right. And it's horses for courses, as you said, this project, you know, what you're measuring and how you define success, isn't necessarily the same as, as on this other project. So let's talk about some of the principles we talked about the values, but, you know, I think it's interesting that, that, that the BizOps coalition, you know, just basically took the time to write these things down and they don't seem all that super insightful, but I guess you just got to get them down and have them on paper and have them in front of your face. But I want to talk about, you know, one of the key ones, which you just talked about, which is changing requirements, right. And working in a dynamic situation, which is really what's driven, you know, this, the software to change in software development, because, you know, if you're in a game app and your competitor comes out with a new blue sword, you got to come out with a new blue sword. >>So whether you had that on your Kanban wall or not. So it's, it's really this embracing of the speed of change and, and, and, and making that, you know, the rule, not the exception. I think that's a phenomenal one. And the other one you talked about is data, right? And that today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be generated by machine learning and AI, and, you know, in the, the big data thing with Hadoop, you know, started years ago, but we are seeing more and more that people are finally figuring it out, that it's not just big data, and it's not even generic machine learning or artificial intelligence, but it's applying those particular data sets and that particular types of algorithms to a specific problem, to your point, to try to actually reach an objective, whether that's, you know, increasing the, your average ticket or, you know, increasing your checkout rate with, with, with shopping carts that don't get left behind in these types of things. So it's a really different way to think about the world in the good old days, probably when you got started, when we had big, giant, you know, MRDs and PRDs and sat down and coded for two years and came out with a product release and hopefully not too many patches subsequently to that. >>It's interesting. Right. Um, again, back to one of these surveys that we did with, uh, with about 600, the ITA executives, and, uh, and, and we, we purposely designed those questions to be pretty open. Um, and, and one of them was really wrong requirements and, uh, and it was really a wrong, uh, kind of what do you, what is the best approach? What is your preferred approach towards requirements? And if I were to remember correctly, over 80% of the it executives set that the best approach they'll prefer to approach these core requirements to be completely defined before software development starts, let me pause there we're 20 years after the agile manifesto, right? And for 80% of these idea executives to basically claim that the best approach is for requirements to be fully baked before salt, before software development starts, basically shows that we still have a very major issue. >>And again, our hypothesis in working with many organizations is that the key challenge is really the boundary between business and it, which is still very much contract based. If you look at the business side, they basically are expecting for it deliver on time on budget, right. But what is the incentive for it to actually delivering on the business outcomes, right? How often is it measured on the business outcomes and not on an SLA or on a budget type criteria? And so that's really the fundamental shift that we need to, we really need to drive up as an industry. Um, and you know, we, we talk about kind of this, this imperative for organizations to operate that's one, and back to the, the, um, you know, various Doris dilemna the key difference between these larger organization is, is really kind of, uh, if you look at the amount of capital investment that they can put into pretty much anything, why are they losing compared to, um, you know, startups? What, why is it that, uh, more than 40% of, uh, personal loans today or issued not by your traditional brick and mortar banks, but by, um, startups? Well, the reason, yes, it's the traditional culture of doing incremental changes and not disrupting ourselves, which Christiansen covered the length, but it's also the inability to really fundamentally change kind of a dynamic picture. We can business it and, and, and partner right. To, to deliver on a specific business outcome. >>All right. I love that. That's a great, that's a great summary. And in fact, getting ready for this interview, I saw you mentioning another thing where, you know, the, the problem with the agile development is that you're actually now getting more silos. Cause you have all these autonomous people working, you know, kind of independently. So it's even a harder challenge for, for the business leaders to, to, as you said, to know, what's actually going on, but, but certainly I w I want to close, um, and talk about the coalition. Um, so clearly these are all great concepts. These are concepts you want to apply to your business every day. Why the coalition, why, you know, take these concepts out to a broader audience, including either your, your competition and the broader industry to say, Hey, we, as a group need to put a stamp of approval on these concepts, these values, these principles. >>So first I think we, we want, um, everybody to realize that we are all talking about the same things, the same concepts. I think we were all from our own different vantage point, realizing that things after change, and again, back to, you know, whether it's value stream management or site reliability engineering, or biz ops, we're all kind of using slightly different languages. Um, and so I think one of the important aspects of BizOps is for us, all of us, whether we're talking about, you know, consulting agile transformation experts, uh, whether we're talking about vendors, right, provides kind of tools and technologies or these large enterprises to transform for all of us to basically have kind of a reference that lets us speak around kind of, um, in a much more consistent way. The second aspect is for, to me is for, um, DS concepts to start to be embraced, not just by us or trying, or, you know, vendors, um, system integrators, consulting firms, educators, thought leaders, but also for some of our old customers to start to become evangelists of their own in the industry. >>So we, our, our objective with the coalition needs to be pretty, pretty broad. Um, and our hope is by, by starting to basically educate, um, our, our joint customers or partners, that we can start to really foster these behaviors and start to really change some of dynamics. So we're very pleased at if you look at, uh, some of the companies which have joined the, the, the, the manifesto. Um, so we have vendors such as desktop or advance, or, um, uh, PagerDuty for instance, or even planned view, uh, one of my direct competitors, um, but also thought leaders like Tom Davenport or, uh, or cap Gemini or, um, um, smaller firms like, uh, business agility, institutes, or agility elf. Um, and so our goal really is to start to bring together, uh, fall years, people would have been LP, large organizations, do digital transformation vendors. We're providing the technologies that many of these organizations use to deliver on this digital preservation and for all of us to start to provide the kind of, uh, education support and tools that the industry needs. Yeah, >>That's great surge. And, uh, you know, congratulations to you and the team. I know this has been going on for a while, putting all this together, getting people to sign onto the manifesto, putting the coalition together, and finally today getting to unveil it to the world in, in a little bit more of a public, uh, opportunity. So again, you know, really good values, really simple principles, something that, that, uh, shouldn't have to be written down, but it's nice cause it is, and now you can print it out and stick it on your wall. So thank you for, uh, for sharing this story and again, congrats to you and the team. >>Thank you. Thanks, Jeff. Appreciate it. >>Oh, my pleasure. Alrighty, surge. If you want to learn more about the BizOps manifest to go to biz ops manifesto.org, read it and you can sign it and you can stay here for more coverage. I'm the cube of the biz ops manifesto unveiled. Thanks for watching. See you next >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of this ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by bill. >>Hey, welcome back, everybody Jeffrey here with the cube. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the biz ops manifesto unveiling. It's been in the works for awhile, but today's the day that it actually kind of come out to the, to the public. And we're excited to have a real industry luminary here to talk about what's going on, why this is important and share his perspective. And we're happy to have from Cape Cod, I believe is Tom Davenport. He is a distinguished author and professor at Babson college. We could go on, he's got a lot of great titles and, and really illuminary in the area of big data and analytics Thomas. Great to see you. >>Thanks Jeff. Happy to be here with you. >>Great. So let's just jump into it, you know, and getting ready for this. I came across your LinkedIn posts. I think you did earlier this summer in June and right off the bat, the first sentence just grabbed my attention. I'm always interested in new attempts to address longterm issues, uh, in how technology works within businesses, biz ops. What did you see in biz ops, uh, that, that kind of addresses one of these really big longterm problems? >>Well, yeah, but the longterm problem is that we've had a poor connection between business people and it people between business objectives and the, it solutions that address them. This has been going on, I think since the beginning of information technology and sadly it hasn't gone away. And so biz ops is a new attempt to deal with that issue with, you know, a new framework, eventually a broad set of solutions that increase the likelihood that we'll actually solve a business problem with an it capability. >>Right. You know, it's interesting to compare it with like dev ops, which I think a lot of people are probably familiar with, which was, you know, built around, uh, agile software development and a theory that we want to embrace change that that changes. Okay. Uh, and we want to be able to iterate quickly and incorporate that. And that's been happening in the software world for, for 20 plus years. What's taken so long to get that to the business side, because as the pace of change has changed on the software side, you know, that's a strategic issue in terms of execution on the business side that they need now to change priorities. And, you know, there's no PRDs and MRDs and big, giant strategic plans that sit on the shelf for five years. That's just not the way business works anymore. It took a long time to get here. >>Yeah, it did. And you know, there have been previous attempts to make a better connection between business and it, there was the so called alignment framework that a couple of friends of mine from Boston university developed, I think more than 20 years ago, but you know, now we have better technology for creating that linkage. And the, you know, the idea of kind of ops oriented frameworks is pretty pervasive now. So I think it's time for another serious attempt at it. Right. >>And do you think doing it this way, right. With the, with the biz ops coalition, you know, getting a collection of, of, of kind of likeminded individuals and companies together, and actually even having a manifesto, which we're making this declarative statement of, of principles and values, you think that's what it takes to kind of drive this kind of beyond the experiment and actually, you know, get it done and really start to see some results in, in, uh, in production in the field. >>I think certainly, um, no one vendor organization can pull this off single handedly. It does require a number of organizations collaborating and working together. So I think our coalition is a good idea and a manifesto is just a good way to kind of lay out what you see as the key principles of the idea. And that makes it much easier for everybody to understand and act on. >>I think it's just, it's really interesting having, you know, having them written down on paper and having it just be so clearly articulated both in terms of the, of the values as well as, as the, uh, the principles and the values, you know, business outcomes matter trust and collaboration, data driven decisions, which is the number three or four, and then learn, respond and pivot. It doesn't seem like those should have to be spelled out so clearly, but, but obviously it helps to have them there. You can stick them on the wall and kind of remember what your priorities are, but you're the data guy. You're the analytics guy, uh, and a big piece of this is data and analytics and moving to data-driven decisions. And principle number seven says, you know, today's organizations generate more data than humans can process and informed decisions can be augmented by machine learning and artificial intelligence right up your alley. You know, you've talked a number of times on kind of the mini stages of analytics. Um, and how has that's evolved over, over time, you know, as you think of analytics and machine learning, driving decisions beyond supporting decisions, but actually starting to make decisions in machine time. What's that, what's that thing for you? What does that make you, you know, start to think, wow, this is, this is going to be pretty significant. >>Yeah. Well, you know, this has been a longterm interest of mine. Um, the last generation of AI, I was very interested in expert systems. And then, um, I think, uh, more than 10 years ago, I wrote an article about automated decision-making using what was available then, which was rule-based approaches. Um, but you know, this addresses an issue that we've always had with analytics and AI. Um, you know, we, we tended to refer to those things as providing decision support. The problem is that if the decision maker didn't want their support, didn't want to use them in order to make a decision, they didn't provide any value. And so the nice thing about automating decisions, um, with now contemporary AI tools is that we can ensure that data and analytics get brought into the decision without any possible disconnection. Now, I think humans still have something to add here, and we often will need to examine how that decision is being made and maybe even have the ability to override it. But in general, I think at least for, you know, repetitive tactical decisions, um, involving a lot of data, we want most of those, I think to be at least recommended if not totally made by an algorithm or an AI based system, and that I believe would add to the quality and the precision and the accuracy of decisions and in most organizations, >>No, I think, I think you just answered my next question before I, before Hey, asked it, you know, we had dr. Robert Gates on a former secretary of defense on a few years back, and we were talking about machines and machines making decisions. And he said at that time, you know, the only weapon systems, uh, that actually had an automated trigger on it were on the North Korea and South Korea border. Um, everything else, as you said, had to go through a sub person before the final decision was made. And my question is, you know, what are kind of the attributes of the decision that enable us to more easily automated? And then how do you see that kind of morphing over time, both as the data to support that as well as our comfort level, um, enables us to turn more and more actual decisions over to the machine? >>Well, yeah, it's suggested we need, um, data and, um, the data that we have to kind of train our models has to be high quality and current. And we, we need to know the outcomes of that data. You know, um, most machine learning models, at least in business are supervised. And that means we need to have labeled outcomes in the, in the training data. But I, you know, um, the pandemic that we're living through is a good illustration of the fact that, that the data also have to be reflective of current reality. And, you know, one of the things that we're finding out quite frequently these days is that, um, the data that we have do not reflect, you know, what it's like to do business in a pandemic. Um, I wrote a little piece about this recently with Jeff cam at wake forest university, we called it data science quarantined, and we interviewed with somebody who said, you know, it's amazing what eight weeks of zeros will do to your demand forecast. We just don't really know what happens in a pandemic. Um, our models maybe have to be put on the shelf for a little while and until we can develop some new ones or we can get some other guidelines into making decisions. So I think that's one of the key things with automated decision making. We have to make sure that the data from the past and that's all we have of course, is a good guide to, you know, what's happening in the present and the future as far as we understand it. Yeah. >>I used to joke when we started this calendar year 2020, it was finally the year that we know everything with the benefit of hindsight, but it turned out 20, 20 a year. We found out we actually know nothing and everything thought we knew, but I wanna, I wanna follow up on that because you know, it did suddenly change everything, right? We got this light switch moment. Everybody's working from home now we're many, many months into it, and it's going to continue for a while. I saw your interview with Bernard Marr and you had a really interesting comment that now we have to deal with this change. We don't have a lot of data and you talked about hold fold or double down. And, and I can't think of a more, you know, kind of appropriate metaphor for driving the value of the BizOps when now your whole portfolio strategy, um, these to really be questioned and, and, you know, you have to be really, uh, well, uh, executing on what you are, holding, what you're folding and what you're doubling down with this completely new environment. >>Well, yeah, and I hope I did this in the interview. I would like to say that I came up with that term, but it actually came from a friend of mine. Who's a senior executive at Genpact. And, um, I, um, used it mostly to talk about AI and AI applications, but I think you could, you could use it much more broadly to talk about your entire sort of portfolio of digital projects. You need to think about, well, um, given some constraints on resources and a difficult economy for a while, which of our projects do we want to keep going on pretty much the way we were and which ones are not that necessary anymore? You see a lot of that in AI, because we had so many pilots, somebody told me, you know, we've got more pilots around here than O'Hare airport and AI. Um, and then, but the ones that involve double down they're even more important to you. They are, you know, a lot of organizations have found this out in the pandemic, on digital projects. It's more and more important for customers to be able to interact with you, um, digitally. And so you certainly wouldn't want to, um, cancel those projects or put them on hold. So you double down on them and get them done faster and better. >>Right, right. Uh, another, another thing that came up in my research that you quoted, um, was, was from Jeff Bezos, talking about the great bulk of what we do is quietly, but meaningfully improving core operations. You know, I think that is so core to this concept of not AI and machine learning and kind of the general sense, which, which gets way too much buzz, but really applied right. Applied to a specific problem. And that's where you start to see the value. And, you know, the, the BizOps, uh, manifesto is, is, is calling it out in this particular process. But I'd love to get your perspective as you know, you speak generally about this topic all the time, but how people should really be thinking about where are the applications where I can apply this technology to get direct business value. >>Yeah, well, you know, even talking about automated decisions, um, uh, the kind of once in a lifetime decisions, uh, the ones that, um, ag Lafley, the former CEO of Procter and gamble used to call the big swing decisions. You only get a few of those. He said in your tenure as CEO, those are probably not going to be the ones that you're automating in part because, um, you don't have much data about them. You're only making them a few times and in part, because, um, they really require that big picture thinking and the ability to kind of anticipate the future, that the best human decision makers, um, have. Um, but, um, in general, I think where they are, the projects that are working well are, you know, when I call the low hanging fruit ones, the, some people even report to it referred to it as boring AI. >>So, you know, sucking data out of a contract in order to compare it to a bill of lading for what arrived at your supply chain companies can save or make a lot of money with that kind of comparison. It's not the most exciting thing, but AI, as you suggested is really good at those narrow kinds of tasks. It's not so good at the, at the really big moonshots, like curing cancer or, you know, figuring out well what's the best stock or bond under all circumstances or even autonomous vehicles. Um, we, we made some great progress in that area, but everybody seems to agree that they're not going to be perfect for quite a while. And we really don't want to be driving around on them very much unless they're, you know, good and all kinds of weather and with all kinds of pedestrian traffic and you know, that sort of thing, right? That's funny you bring up contract management. >>I had a buddy years ago, they had a startup around contract management and was like, and this was way before we had the compute power today and cloud proliferation. I said, you know, how, how can you possibly build software around contract management? It's language, it's legal, ease. It's very specific. And he's like, Jeff, we just need to know where's the contract. And when does it expire? And who's the signatory. And he built a business on those, you know, very simple little facts that weren't being covered because their contracts contractor in people's drawers and files and homes, and Lord only knows. So it's really interesting, as you said, these kind of low hanging fruit opportunities where you can extract a lot of business value without trying to, you know, boil the ocean. >>Yeah. I mean, if you're Amazon, um, uh, Jeff Bezos thinks it's important to have some kind of billion dollar projects. And he even says it's important to have a billion dollar failure or two every year. But I think most organizations probably are better off being a little less aggressive and, you know, sticking to, um, what AI has been doing for a long time, which is, you know, making smarter decisions based on, based on data. >>Right? So Tom, I want to shift gears one more time before, before we let you go on on kind of a new topic for you, not really new, but you know, not, not a, the vast majority of, of your publications and that's the new way to work, you know, as, as the pandemic hit in mid March, right. And we had this light switch moment, everybody had to work from home and it was, you know, kind of crisis and get everybody set up. Well, you know, now we're five months, six months, seven months. A number of companies have said that people are not going to be going back to work for a while. And so we're going to continue on this for a while. And then even when it's not what it is now, it's not going to be what it was before. So, you know, I wonder, and I know you, you, uh, you teased, you're working on a new book, you know, some of your thoughts on, you know, kind of this new way to work and, and the human factors in this new, this new kind of reality that we're kind of evolving into, I guess. >>Yeah. I missed was an interest of mine. I think, um, back in the nineties, I wrote an article called, um, a coauthored, an article called two cheers for the virtual office. And, you know, it was just starting to emerge. Then some people were very excited about it. Some people were skeptical and, uh, we said two cheers rather than three cheers because clearly there's some shortcomings. And, you know, I keep seeing these pop up. It's great that we can work from our homes. It's great that we can accomplish most of what we need to do with a digital interface, but, um, you know, things like innovation and creativity and certainly, um, uh, a good, um, happy social life kind of requires some face to face contact every now and then. And so I, you know, I think we'll go back to an environment where there is some of that. >>Um, we'll have, um, times when people convene in one place so they can get to know each other face to face and learn from each other that way. And most of the time, I think it's a huge waste of people's time to commute into the office every day and to jump on airplanes, to, to, um, give every little, um, uh, sales call or give every little presentation. Uh, we just have to really narrow down what are the circumstances where face to face contact really matters. And when can we get by with, with digital, you know, I think one of the things in my current work I'm finding is that even when you have AI based decision making, you really need a good platform in which that all takes place. So in addition to these virtual platforms, we need to develop platforms that kind of structure the workflow for us and tell us what we should be doing next, then make automated decisions when necessary. And I think that ultimately is a big part of biz ops as well. It's not just the intelligence of an AI system, but it's the flow of work that kind of keeps things moving smoothly throughout your organization. >>Yeah. I think such, such a huge opportunity as you just said, cause I forget the stats on how often we're interrupted with notifications between email texts, Slack, a sauna, Salesforce, the list goes on and on. So, you know, to put an AI layer between the person and all these systems that are begging for attention, and you've written a book on the attention economy, which is a whole nother topic, we'll say for another day, you know, it really begs, it really begs for some assistance because you know, you just can't get him picked, you know, every two minutes and really get quality work done. It's just not, it's just not realistic. And you know what? I don't think that's a feature that we're looking for. I agree. Totally. Alright, Tom. Well, thank you so much for your time. Really enjoyed the conversation. I gotta dig into the library. It's very long. So I might start at the attention economy. I haven't read that one in to me. I think that's the fascinating thing in which we're living. So thank you for your time and, uh, great to see you. >>My pleasure, Jeff. Great to be here. >>All right. Take care. Alright. He's Tom I'm Jeff. You are watching the continuing coverage of the biz ops manifesto and Vale. Thanks for watching the cube. We'll see you next time.

>>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage, a BizOps manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with the cube. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the biz ops manifesto. Unveil. Something has been in the works for a little while. Today's the formal unveiling, and we're excited to have three of the core of founding members of the manifesto authors of the manifesto. If you will, uh, joining us again, we've had them all on individually. Now we're going to have a great power panel first up. We're gab Mitt, Kirsten returning he's the founder and CEO of Tasktop mic. Good to see you again. Where are you dialing in from? >>Great to see you again, Jeff I'm dialing from Vancouver, >>We're Canada, Vancouver, Canada. One of my favorite cities in the whole wide world. Also we've got Tom Davenport come in from across the country. He's a distinguished professor and author from Babson college, Tom. Great to see you. And I think you said you're at a fun, exotic place on the East coast >>Realm of Memphis shoe sits on Cape Cod. >>Great to see you again and also joining surge Lucio. He is the VP and general manager enterprise software division at Broadcom surge. Great to see you again, where are you coming in from? >>Uh, from Boston right next to kickoff. >>Terrific. So welcome back, everybody again. Congratulations on this day. I know it's, it's been a lot of work to get here for this unveil, but let's just jump into it. The biz ops manifesto, what was the initial reason to do this? And how did you decide to do it in a kind of a coalition, a way bringing together a group of people versus just making it an internal company, uh, initiative that, you know, you can do better stuff within your own company, surge, why don't we start with you? >>Yeah, so, so I think we were at a really critical juncture, right? Many, um, large enterprises are basically struggling with their digital transformation. Um, in fact, um, many recognize that, uh, the, the business side, it collaboration has been, uh, one of the major impediments, uh, to drive that kind of transformation. And if we look at the industry today, many people are, whether we're talking about vendors or, um, you know, system integrators, consulting firms are talking about the same kind of concepts, but using very different language. And so we believe that bringing all these different players together, um, as part of the coalition and formalizing, uh, basically the core principles and values in a BizOps manifesto, we can really start to F could have a much bigger movement where we can all talk about kind of the same concepts and we can really start to provide, could have a much better support for large organizations to transform. Uh, so whether it is technology or services or, um, we're training, I think that that's really the value of bringing all of these players together, right. >>And Nick to you, why did you get involved in this, in this effort? >>So Ben close and follow the agile movement since it started two decades ago with that manifesto. >>And I think we got a lot of improvement at the team level, and I think as satisfies noted, uh, we really need to improve at the business level. Every company is trying to become a software innovator, uh, trying to make sure that they can adapt quickly and the changing market economy and what everyone's dealing with in terms of needing to deliver the customer sooner. However, agile practices have really focused on these metrics, these measures and understanding processes that help teams be productive. Those things now need to be elevated to the business as a whole. And that just hasn't happened. Uh, organizations are actually failing because they're measuring activities and how they're becoming more agile, how teams are functioning, not how much quickly they're delivering value to the customer. So we need to now move past that. And that's exactly what the that's manifested provides. Right, >>Right, right. And Tom, to you, you've been covering tech for a very long time. You've been looking at really hard challenges and a lot of work around analytics and data and data evolution. So there's a definitely a data angle here. I wonder if you could kind of share your perspective of what you got excited to, uh, to sign onto this manifesto. >>Sure. Well, I have, you know, for the past 15 or 20 years, I've been focusing on data and analytics and AI, but before that I was a process management guy and a knowledge management guy. And in general, I think, you know, we've just kind of optimized that to narrow a level, whether you're talking about agile or dev ops or ML ops, any of these kinds of ops oriented movements, we're making individual project, um, performance and productivity better, but we're not changing the business, uh, effectively enough. And that's the thing that appealed to me about the biz ops idea that we're finally creating a closer connection between what we do with technology and how it changes the business and provides value to it. >>Great. Uh, surge back to you, right? I mean, people have been talking about digital transformation for a long time and it's been, you know, kind of trucking along and then covert hit and it was instant lights, which everyone's working from home. You've got a lot more reliance on your digital tools, digital communication, uh, both within your customer base and your partner base, but also then your employees when you're, if you could share how that really pushed this all along. Right? Because now suddenly the acceleration of digital transformation is higher. Even more importantly, you got much more critical decisions to make into what you do next. So kind of your portfolio management of projects has been elevated significantly when maybe revenues are down, uh, and you really have to, uh, to prioritize and get it right. >>Yeah. Maybe I'll just start by quoting Satina Nello basically recently said that they're speeding the two years of digital preservation just last two months in any many ways. That's true. Um, but, but yet when we look at large enterprises, they're >>Still struggling with the kind of a changes in culture that they really need to drive to be able to disrupt themselves. And not surprisingly, you know, when we look at certain parts of the industry, you know, we see some things which are very disturbing, right? So about 40% of the personal loans today, or being, uh, origin data it's by fintechs, uh, of a like of Sophie or, uh, or a lending club, right? Not to a traditional brick and mortar for BEC. And so the, well, there is kind of a much more of an appetite and it's a, it's more of a survival type of driver these days. Uh, the reality is that's in order for these large enterprises to truly transform and engage with this digital transformation, they need to start to really align the business. And it, you know, in many ways, uh, make covered that agile really emerged from the core desire to truly improve software predictability between which we've really missed is all that we, we start to aligning the software predictability to business predictability and to be able to have continual sleep continuous improvement and measurement of business outcomes. So by aligning kind of these, uh, kind of inward metrics, that's, it is typically being using to business outcomes. We think we can start to really ELP different stakeholders within the organization to collaborate. So I think there is more than ever. There's an imperative to act now. Um, and, and resolves, I think is kind of the right approach to drive that transformation. Right. >>I want to follow up on the culture comment, uh, with Utah, because you've talked before about kind of process flow and process flow throughout a whore and an organization. And, you know, we talk about people process and tech all the time. And I think the tech is the easy part compared to actually changing the people the way they think. And then the actual processes that they put in place. It's a much more difficult issue than just the tech issue to get this digital transformation in your organization. >>Yeah. You know, I've always found that the soft stuff about, you know, the culture of the behavior, the values is the hard stuff to change and more and more, we, we realized that to be successful with any kind of digital transformation you have to change people's behaviors and attitudes. Um, we haven't made as much progress in that area as we might have. I mean, I've done some surveys suggesting that, um, most organizations still don't have data-driven cultures. And in many cases there is a lower percentage of companies that say they have that then, um, did a few years ago. So we're kind of moving in the wrong direction, which means I think that we have to start explicitly addressing that, um, cultural, behavioral dimension and not just assuming that it will happen if we, if we build a system, >>If we build it, they won't necessarily come. Right. >>Right. So I want to go to, to you Nick cause you know, we're talking about workflows and flow, um, and, and you've written about flow both in terms of, um, you know, moving things along a process and trying to find bottlenecks, identify bottlenecks, which is now even more important again, when these decisions are much more critical. Cause you have a lot less, uh, wiggle room in tough times, but you also talked about flow from the culture side and the people side. So I wonder if you can just share your thoughts on, you know, using flow as a way to think about things, to get the answers better. >>Yeah, absolutely. And I'll refer back to what Tom has said. If you're optimized, you need to optimize your system. You need to optimize how you innovate and how you deliver value to the business and the customer. Now, what we've noticed in the data, since that we've learned from customers, value streams, enterprise organizations, value streams, is that when it's taking six months at the end to deliver that value with the flow is that slow. You've got a bunch of unhappy developers, unhappy customers when you're innovating house. So high performing organizations we can measure at antenna flow time and dates. All of a sudden that feedback loop, the satisfaction, your developers measurably, it goes up. So not only do you have people context, switching glass, you're delivering so much more value to customers at a lower cost because you've optimized for flow rather than optimizing for these, these other approximate tricks that we use, which is how efficient is my adult team. How quickly can we deploy software? Those are important, but they do not provide the value of agility of fast learning of adaptability to the business. And that's exactly what the biz ops manifesto pushes your organization to do. You need to put in place this new operating model that's based on flow on the delivery of business value and on bringing value to market much more quickly than you were before. Right. >>I love that. And I'm gonna back to you Tom, on that to follow up. Cause I think, I don't think people think enough about how they prioritize what they're optimizing for, because you know, if you're optimizing for a versus B, you know, you can have a very different product that, that you kick out. And, you know, my favorite example is with Clayton Christianson and innovator's dilemma talking about the three inch hard drive, if you optimize it for power, you know, is one thing, if you optimize it for vibration is another thing and sure enough, you know, they missed it on the poem because it was the, it was the game console, which, which drove that whole business. So when you're talking to customers and we think we hear it with cloud all the time, people optimizing for a cost efficiency, instead of thinking about it as an innovation tool, how do you help them kind of rethink and really, you know, force them to, to look at the, at the prioritization and make sure they're prioritizing on the right thing is make just that, what are you optimizing for? >>Oh yeah. Um, you have one of the most important aspects of any decision or attempt to resolve a problem in an organization is the framing process. And, um, you know, it's, it's a difficult aspect to have the decision to confirm it correctly in the first place. Um, there, it's not a technology issue. In many cases, it's largely a human issue, but if you frame >>That decision or that problem incorrectly to narrowly say, or you frame it as an either or situation where you could actually have some of both, um, it, it's very difficult for the, um, process to work out correctly. So in many cases, I think we need to think more at the beginning about how we bring this issue or this decision in the best way possible before we charge off and build a system to support it. You know, um, it's worth that extra time to think, think carefully about how the decision has been structured. Right, >>Sir, I want to go back to you and talk about the human factors because as we just discussed, you can put it in great technology, but if the culture doesn't adopt it and people don't feel good about it, you know, it's not going to be successful and that's going to reflect poorly on the technology, even if that had nothing to do with it. And you know, when you look at the, the, the, the core values, uh, of the Bezos manifesto, you know, a big one is trust and collaboration, you know, learn, respond, and pivot. Wonder if you can share your thoughts on, on trying to get that cultural shift, uh, so that you can have success with the people, or excuse me, with the technology in the process and helping customers, you know, take this more trustworthy and kind of proactive, uh, position. >>So I think, I think at the ground level, it truly starts with the realization that we're all different. We come from different backgrounds. Uh, oftentimes we tend to blame the data. It's not uncommon my experiments that we spend the first 30 minutes of any kind of one hour conversation to debate the validity of the data. Um, and so, um, one of the first kind of, uh, probably manifestations that we've had or revelations as we start to engage with our customers is spoke just exposing, uh, high-fidelity data sets to different stakeholders from their different lens. We start to enable these different stakeholders to not debate the data. That's really collaborate to find a solution. So in many ways, when, when, when we think about kind of the types of changes we're trying to, to truly affect around data driven decision making, he told about bringing the data in context and the context that is relevant and understandable for, for different stakeholders, whether we're talking about an operator or develop for a business analyst. >>So that's, that's the first thing. The second layer I think, is really to provide context to what people are doing in their specific silo. And so I think one of the best examples I have is if you start to be able to align business KPI, whether you are counting, you know, sales per hour, or the engagements of your users on your mobile applications, whatever it is, you can start to connect that PKI to business KPI, to the KPIs that developers might be looking at, whether it is all the number of defects or velocity or whatever over your metrics that you're used to, to actually track you start to be able to actually contextualize in what we are, the effecting, basically a metric of that that is really relevant. And then what we see is that this is a much more systematic way to approach the transformation than say, you know, some organizations kind of creating some of these new products or services or initiatives, um, to, to drive engagements, right? >>So if you look at zoom, for instance, zoom giving away a it service to, uh, to education, he's all about, I mean, there's obviously a marketing aspect in there, but it's, it's fundamentally about trying to drive also the engagement of their own teams. And because now they're doing something for good and many organizations are trying to do that, but you only can do this kind of things in the limited way. And so you really want to start to rethink how you connect to, everybody's kind of a business objective fruit data, and now you start to get people to stare at the same data from their own lens and collaborate on all the data. Right, >>Right. That's a good, uh, Tom, I want to go back to you. You've been studying it for a long time, writing lots of books and getting into it. Um, why now, you know, what, why, why now are we finally aligning business objectives with, with it objectives? You know, why didn't this happen before? And, you know, what are the factors that are making now the time for this, this, this move with the, uh, with the biz ops? >>Well, and much of a past, it was sort of a back office related activity. And, you know, it was important for, um, uh, producing your paychecks and, uh, capturing the customer orders, but the business wasn't built around it now, every organization needs to be a software business, a data business, a digital business, the auntie has been raised considerably. And if you aren't making that connection between your business objectives and the technology that supports it, you run a pretty big risk of, you know, going out of business or losing out to competitors. Totally. So, um, and even if you're in, uh, an industry that hasn't historically been terribly, um, technology oriented customer expectations flow from, uh, you know, the digital native, um, companies that they work with to basically every industry. So you're compared against the best in the world. So we don't really have the luxury anymore of screwing up our it projects or building things that don't really work for the business. Um, it's mission critical that we do that well. Um, almost every time, I just want to fall by that, Tom, >>In terms of the, you've talked extensively about kind of these evolutions of data and analytics from artismal stage to the big data stage, the data economy stage, the AI driven stage and what I find diff interesting that all those stages, you always put a start date, you never put an end date. Um, so you know, is the, is the big data I'm just going to use that generically a moment in time finally here where we're, you know, off mahogany row with the data scientists, but actually can start to see the promise of delivering the right insight to the right person at the right time to make that decision. >>Well, I think it is true that in general, these previous stages never seemed to go away. The, um, the artisinal stuff is still being done, but we would like for less and less of it to be artisinal, we can't really afford for everything to be artisinal anymore. It's too labor and, and time consuming to do things that way. So we shift more and more of it to be done through automation and B to be done with a higher level of productivity. And, um, you know, at some point maybe we reached the stage where we don't do anything artisanally anymore. I'm not sure we're there yet, but we are, we are making progress. Right. >>Right. And Mick, back to you in terms of looking at agile, cause you're, you're such a student of agile. When, when you look at the opportunity with biz ops and taking the lessons from agile, you know, what's been the inhibitor to stop this in the past. And what are you so excited about? You know, taking this approach will enable. >>Yeah. I think both search and Tom hit on this is that in agile what's happened is that we've been measuring tiny subsets of the value stream, right? We need to elevate the data's there. Developers are working on these tools that delivering features that the foundations for for great culture are there. I spent two decades as a developer. And when I was really happy is when I was able to deliver value to customers, the quicker I was able to do that the fewer impediments are in my way, that quicker was deployed and running in the cloud, the happier I was, and that's exactly what's happening. If we can just get the right data, uh, elevated to the business, not just to the agile teams, but really this, these values of ours are to make sure that you've got these data driven decisions with meaningful data that's oriented around delivering value to customers. Not only these legacies that Tom touched on, which has cost center metrics. So when, from where for it being a cost center and something that provided email and then back office systems. So we need to rapidly shift to those new, meaningful metrics that are customized business centric and make sure that every development the organization is focused on those as well as the business itself, that we're measuring value. And that will help you that value flow without interruptions. >>I love that mic. Cause if you don't measure it, you can't improve on it and you gotta, but you gotta be measuring the right thing. So gentlemen, uh, thank you again for, for your time. Uh, congratulations on the, uh, on the unveil of the biz ops manifesto and bringing together this coalition, uh, of, of, uh, industry experts to get behind this. And, you know, there's probably never been a more important time than now to make sure that your prioritization is in the right spot and you're not wasting resources where you're not going to get the ROI. So, uh, congratulations again. And thank you for sharing your thoughts with us here on the cube. >>Thank you. >>Alright, so we had surge Tom and Mick I'm. Jeff, you're watching the cube. It's a biz ops manifesto unveil. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of biz ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back. Variety. Jeff Frick here with the cube. We're in our Palo Alto studios, and we'd like to welcome you back to our continuing coverage of biz ops manifesto unveil some exciting day to really, uh, kind of bring this out into public. There's been a little bit of conversation, but today's really the official unveiling and we're excited to have our next guest is share a little bit more information on it. He's Patrick tickle. He's a chief product officer for planned view. Patrick. Great to see you. >>Yeah, it's great to be here. Thanks for the invite. So why >>The biz ops manifesto, why the biz ops coalition now when you guys have been at it, it's relatively mature marketplace businesses. Good. What was missing? Why, why this, why this coalition? >>Yeah. So, you know, again, why is, why is biz ops important and why is this something that I'm, you know, I'm so excited about, but I think companies as well, right? Well, no, in some ways or another, this is a topic that I've been talking to the market and our customers about for a long time. And it's, you know, I really applaud this whole movement. Right. And, um, it resonates with me because I think one of the fundamental flaws, frankly, of the way we have talked about technology and business literally for decades, uh, has been this idea of, uh, alignment. Those who know me, I occasionally get off on this little rant about the word alignment, right. But to me, the word alignment is, is actually indicative of the, of the, of the flaw in a lot of our organizations and biz ops is really, I think now trying to catalyze and expose that flaw. >>Right. Because, you know, I always say that, you know, you know, alignment implies silos, right. Instantaneously, as soon as you say there's alignment, there's, there's obviously somebody who's got a direction and other people that have to line up and that kind of siloed, uh, nature of organizations then frankly, the passive nature of it. Right. I think so many technology organizations are like, look, the business has the strategy you guys need to align. Right. And, and, you know, as a product leader, right. That's where I've been my whole career. Right. I can tell you that I never sit around. I almost never use the word alignment. Right. I mean, whether, you know, I never sit down and say, you know, the product management team has to get aligned with dev, right. Or the dev team has to get aligned with the delivery and ops teams. I mean, what I say is, you know, are we on strategy, right? >>Like we've, we have a strategy as a, as a full end to end value stream. Right. And that there's no silos. And I mean, look, every on any given day we got to get better. Right. But the context, the context we operate is not about alignment. Right. It's about being on strategy. And I think I've talked to customers a lot about that, but when I first read the manifesto, I was like, Oh yeah, this is exactly. This is breaking down. Maybe trying to eliminate the word alignment, you know, from a lot of our organizations, because we literally start thinking about one strategy and how we go from strategy to delivery and have it be our strategy, not someone else's that we're all aligning to. And I, and it's a great way to catalyze that conversation that I've, it's been in my mind for years, to be honest. Right. >>So, so much to unpack there. One of the things obviously, uh, stealing a lot from, from dev ops and the dev ops manifesto from 20 years ago. And, and as I look through some of the principles and I looked through some of the values, which are, you know, really nicely laid out here, you know, satisfy customer, do continuous delivery, uh, measure, output against real results. Um, the ones that, that jumps out though is really about, you know, change, change, right? Requirements should change frequently. They do change frequently, but I'm curious to get your take from a, from a software development point, it's easy to kind of understand, right. We're making this widget and our competitors, beta widget plus X, and now we need to change our plans and make sure that the plus X gets added to the plan. Maybe it wasn't in the plan, but you talked a lot about product strategy. So in this kind of continuous delivery world, how does that meld with, I'm actually trying to set a strategy, which implies the direction for a little bit further out on the horizon and to stay on that while at the same time, you're kind of doing this real time continual adjustments because you're not working off a giant PRD or MRD anymore. >>Yeah, yeah, totally. Yeah. You know, one of the terms, you know, that we use internally a lot and even with my customers, our customers is we talk about this idea of rewiring, right. And I think, you know, it's kind of a, now an analogy for transformation. And I think a lot of us have to rewire the way we think about things. Right. And I think at Planview where we have a lot of customers who live in that, you know, who operationalize that traditional PPM world. Right. And are shifting to agile and transforming that rewire is super important. And, and to your point, right, it's, you've just, you've got to embrace this idea of, you know, just iterative getting better every day and iterating, iterating, iterating as opposed to building annual plans or, you know, I get customers occasionally who asked me for two or three year roadmap. >>Right. And I literally looked at them and I go, there's no, there's no scenario where I can build a two or three year roadmap. Right. You, you, you think you want that, but that's not, that's not the way we run. Right. And I will tell you the biggest thing that for us, you know, that I think is matched the planning, uh, you know, patents is a word I like to use a lot. So the thing that we've like, uh, that we've done from a planning perspective, I think is matched impedance to continuous delivery is instituting the whole program, implement, you know, the program, increment planning, capabilities, and methodologies, um, in the scaled agile world. Right. And over the last 18 months to two years, we really have now, you know, instrumented our company across three value streams. You know, we do quarterly PI program increment 10 week planning, you know, and that becomes, that becomes the Terra firma of how we plan. >>Right. And it's, what are we doing for the next 10 weeks? And we iterate within those 10 weeks, but we also know that 10 weeks from now, we're gonna, we're gonna adjust iterate again. Right. And that shifting of that planning model to, you know, to being as cross-functional is that as that big room planning kind of model is, um, and also, uh, you know, on that shorter increment, when you get those two things in place, also the impedance really starts to match up, uh, with continuous delivery and it changes, it changes the way you plan and it changes the way you work. Right? >>Yeah. Their thing. Right. So obviously a lot of these things are kind of process driven, both within the values, as well as the principles, but there's a whole lot, really about culture. And I just want to highlight a couple of the values, right? We already talked about business outcomes, um, trust and collaboration, uh, data driven decisions, and then learn, respond and pivot. Right. A lot of those are cultural as much as they are process. So again, is it the, is it the need to really kind of just put them down on paper and, you know, I can't help, but think of, you know, the hammer and up the, a, the thing in the Lutheran church with it, with their manifesto, is it just good to get it down on paper? Because when you read these things, you're like, well, of course we should trust people. And of course we need an environment of collaboration and of course we want data driven decisions, but as we all know saying it and living, it are two very, very different things. >>Yeah. Good question. I mean, I think there's a lot of ways to bring that to life you're right. And just hanging up, you know, I think we've all been through the hanging up posters around your office, which these days, right. Unless you're going to hang a poster in everybody's home office. Right. You can't even, you can't even fake it that you think that might work. Right. So, um, you know, you really, I think we've attacked that in a variety of ways. Right. And you definitely have to, you know, you've got to make the shift to a team centric culture, right. Empowered teams, you know, that's a big deal. Right. You know, a lot of, a lot of the people that, you know, we lived in a world of quote, unquote work. We lived in a deep resource management world for a long, long time, and right. >>A lot of our customers still do that, but, you know, kind of moving to that team centric world is, uh, is really important and core to the trust. Um, I think training is super important, right. I mean, we've, you know, we've internally, right. We've trained hundreds employees over the last a year and a half on the fundamentals really of safe. Right. Not necessarily, you know, we've had, we've had teams delivering in scrum and the continuous delivery for, you know, for years, but the scaling aspect of it, uh, is where we've done a lot of training investment. Um, and then, you know, I think a leadership has to be bought in. Right. You know? And so when we pie plan, you know, myself and Cameron and the other members of our leadership, you know, we're NPI planning, you know, for, for four days. Right. I mean, it's, it's, you've got to walk the walk, you know, from top to bottom and you've got to train on the context. Right. And then you, and then, and, and then once you get through a few cycles where you've done a pivot, right. Or you brought a new team in, and it just works, it becomes kind of this virtuous circle where he'll go, man, this really works so much better than what we used to do. Right. >>Right. The other really key principle to this whole thing is, is aligning, you know, the business leaders and the business prioritization, um, so that you can get to good outcomes with the development and the delivery. Right. And we know again, and kind of classic dev ops to get the dev and the production people together. So they can, you know, quickly ship code that works. Um, but adding the business person on there really puts, puts a little extra responsibility that they, they understand the value of a particular feature or particular priority. Uh, they, they can make the, the, the trade offs and that they kind of understand the effort involved too. So, you know, bringing them into this continuous again, kind of this continuous development process, um, to make sure that things are better aligned and really better prioritize. Cause ultimately, you know, we don't live in an infinite resources situation and people gotta make trade offs. They gotta make decisions as to what goes and what doesn't go in for everything that goes. Right. I always say you pick one thing. Okay. That's 99 other things that couldn't go. So it's really important to have, you know, this, you said alignment of the business priorities as well as, you know, the execution within, within the development. >>Yeah. I think that, you know, uh, you know, I think it was probably close to two years ago. Forester started talking about the age of the customer, right. That, that was like their big theme at the time. Right. And I think to me what that, the age of the customer actually translates to and Mick, Mick and I are both big fans of this whole idea of the project, the product shift, mixed book, you know, it was a great piece on a, you're talking to Mick, you know, as part of the manifesto is one of the authors as well, but this shift from project to product, right? Like the age of the customer, in my opinion, the, the, the embodiment of that is the shift to a product mentality. Right. And, and the product mentality in my opinion, is what brings the business and technology teams together, right? >>Once you, once you're focused on a customer experience, that's delivered through a product or a service that's when I that's, when I started to go with the alignment problem goes away, right. Because if you look at software companies, right, I mean, we run product management models, you know, with software development teams, customer success teams, right. That, you know, the software component of these products that people are building is obviously becoming bigger and bigger, you know, in an, in many ways, right. More and more organizations are trying to model themselves over as operationally like software companies. Right. Um, they obviously have lots of other components in their business than just software, but I think that whole model of customer experience equaling product, and then the software component of product, the product is the essence of what changes that alignment equation and brings business and teams together because all of a sudden, everyone knows what the customer's experiencing. Right. And, and that, that, that makes a lot of things very clear, very quickly. >>Right. I'm just curious how far along this was as a process before, before covert hit, right. Because serendipitous, whatever. Right. But th the sudden, you know, light switch moment, everybody had to go work from home and in March 15th compared to now, we're in October, and this is going to be going on for a while, and it is a new normal and whatever that whatever's going to look like a year from now, or two years from now is TBD, you know, had you guys already started on this journey cause again, to sit down and actually declare this coalition and declare this manifesto is a lot different than just trying to do better within your own organization. >>Yeah. So we had started, uh, you know, w we definitely had started independently, you know, some, some, you know, I think people in the community know that, uh, we, we came together with a company called lean kit a handful of years ago, and I give John Terry actually one of the founders leaned to immense credit for, you know, kind of spearheading our cultural change and not, and not because of, we were just going to be, you know, bringing agile solutions to our customers, but because, you know, he believed that it was going to be a fundamentally better way for us to work. Right. And we kind of, you know, when we started with John and built, you know, out of concentric circles of momentum and, and we've gotten to the place where now it's just part of who we are, but, but I do think that, you know, COVID has, you know, um, I think pre COVID a lot of companies, you know, would, would adopt, you know, the, you would adopt digital slash agile transformation. >>Um, traditional industries may have done it as a reaction to disruption. Right. You know, and in many cases, the disruption to these traditional industries was, I would say a product oriented company, right. That probably had a larger software component, and that disruption caused a competitive issue or a customer issue that caused companies and tried to respond by transforming. I think COVID, you know, all of a sudden flatten that out, right. We literally all got disrupted. Right. And, and so all of a sudden, every one of us is dealing with some degree of market uncertainty, customer uncertainty, uh, and also know none of us were insulated from the need to be able to pivot faster, deliver incrementally, you know, and operate in a different, completely more agile way, uh, you know, post COVID. Right. Yeah. That's great. >>So again, a very, very, very timely, you know, a little bit of serendipity, a little bit of, of planning. And, you know, as, as with all important things, there's always a little bit of luck and a lot of hard work involved. So a really interesting thank you for, for your leadership, Patrick. And, you know, it really makes a statement. I think when you have a bunch of leaderships across an industry coming together and putting their name on a piece of paper, uh, that's aligned around us some principles and some values, which again, if you read them who wouldn't want to get behind these, but if it takes, you know, something a little bit more formal, uh, to kind of move the ball down the field, and then I totally get it and a really great work. Thanks for, uh, thanks for doing it. >>Oh, absolutely. No. Like I said, the first time I read it, I was like, yeah, like you said, this is all, this all makes complete sense, but just documenting it and saying it and talking about it moves the needle. I'll tell you as a company, you gotta, we're pushing really hard on, uh, you know, on our own internal strategy on diversity inclusion. Right? And, and like, once we wrote the words down about what, you know, what we aspire to be from a diversity and inclusion perspective, it's the same thing. Everybody reads the words and goes, why wouldn't we do this? Right. But until you write it down and kind of have again, a manifesto or a Terrafirma of what you're trying to accomplish, you know, then you can rally behind it. Right. As opposed to it being something that's, everybody's got their own version of the flavor. Right. And I think it's a very analogous, you know, kind of, uh, initiative, right. And, uh, and this happening, both of those things, right. Are happening across the industry these days. Right. >>And measure it too. Right. And measure it, measure, measure, measure, get a baseline. Even if you don't like to measure, even if you don't like what the, even if you can argue against the math, behind the measurement, measure it, and at least you can measure it again and you can, and you've got some type of a comp and that is really the only way to, to move it forward. Well, Patrick really enjoyed the conversation. Thanks for, uh, for taking a few minutes out of your day. >>It's great to be here. It's an awesome movement and we're glad >>That'd be part of it. All right. Thanks. And if you want to check out the biz ops, Manifesta go to biz ops, manifesto.org, read it. You might want to sign it. It's there for you. And thanks for tuning in on this segment will continuing coverage of the biz op manifesto unveil here on the cube. I'm Jeff, thanks for watching >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of biz ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back, everybody Jeffrey here with the cube. We're coming to you from our Palo Alto studios. And welcome back to this event is the biz ops manifesto unveiling. So the biz ops manifesto and the biz ops coalition had been around for a little while, but today's the big day. That's kind of the big public unveiling or excited to have some of the foundational people that, you know, have put their, put their name on the dotted, if you will, to support this initiative and talk about why that initiative is so important. And so the next guest we're excited to have is dr. Mick Kirsten. He is the founder and CEO of Tasktop mic. Great to see you coming in from Vancouver, Canada, I think, right? Yes. Thank you. Absolutely. I hope your air is a little better out there. I know you had some of the worst air of all of us, a couple, a couple of weeks back. So hopefully things are, uh, are getting a little better and we get those fires under control. Yeah. >>Things have cleared up now. So yeah, it's good. It's good to be close to the U S and it's going to have the Arabic cleaner as well. >>Absolutely. So let's, let's jump into it. So you you've been an innovation guy forever starting way back in the day and Xerox park. I was so excited to do an event at Xerox park for the first time last year. I mean, that, that to me represents along with bell labs and, and some other, you know, kind of foundational innovation and technology centers, that's gotta be one of the greatest ones. So I just wonder if you could share some perspective of getting your start there at Xerox park, you know, some of the lessons you learned and what you've been able to kind of carry forward from those days. >>Yeah. I was fortunate to join Xerox park in the computer science lab there at a very early point in my career, and to be working on open source programming languages. So back then in the computer science lab, where some of the inventions around programming around software development teams, such as object oriented programming, and a lot of what we had around really modern programming levels constructs, those were the teams I have the fortune of working with, and really our goal was. And of course there's as, as you know, uh, there's just this DNA of innovation and excitement and innovation in the water. And really it was the model back then was all about changing the way that we work, uh, was looking at for how we could make it 10 times easier to write code. But this is back in 99. And we were looking at new ways of expressing, especially business concerns, especially ways of enabling people who are, who want to innovate for their business to express those concerns in code and make that 10 times easier than what that would take. >>So we create a new open source programming language, and we saw some benefits, but not quite quite what we expected. I then went and actually joined Charles Stephanie, that former to fucking Microsoft who was responsible for, he actually got Microsoft word as a spark and into Microsoft and into the hands of bill Gates on that company. I was behind the whole office suite and his vision. And then when I was trying to execute with, working for him was to make PowerPoint like a programming language, make everything completely visual. And I realized none of this was really working in that there was something else, fundamentally wrong programming languages, or new ways of building software. Like let's try and do with Charles around intentional programming. That was not enough. >>That was not enough. So, you know, the agile movement got started about 20 years ago, and we've seen the rise of dev ops and really this kind of embracing of, of, of sprints and, you know, getting away from MRDs and PRDs and these massive definitions of what we're going to build and long build cycles to this iterative process. And this has been going on for a little while. So what was still wrong? What was still missing? Why the BizOps coalition, why the biz ops manifesto? >>Yeah, so I basically think we nailed some of the things that the program language levels of teams can have effective languages deployed soften to the cloud easily now, right? And at the kind of process and collaboration and planning level agile two decades, decades ago was formed. We were adopting and all the, all the teams I was involved with and it's really become a self problem. So agile tools, agile teams, agile ways of planning, uh, are now very mature. And the whole challenge is when organizations try to scale that. And so what I realized is that the way that agile was scaling across teams and really scaling from the technology part of organization to the business was just completely flawed. The agile teams had one set of doing things, one set of metrics, one set of tools. And the way that the business was working was planning was investing in technology was just completely disconnected and using a whole different set of advisors. >>Interesting. Cause I think it's pretty clear from the software development teams in terms of what they're trying to deliver. Cause they've got a feature set, right. And they've got bugs and it's easy to, it's easy to see what they deliver, but it sounds like what you're really honing in on is this disconnect on the business side, in terms of, you know, is it the right investment? You know, are we getting the right business ROI on this investment? Was that the right feature? Should we be building another feature or should we building a completely different product set? So it sounds like it's really a core piece of this is to get the right measurement tools, the right measurement data sets so that you can make the right decisions in terms of what you're investing, you know, limited resources. You can't, no one has unlimited resources and ultimately have to decide what to do, which means you're also deciding what not to do. And it sounds like that's a really big piece of this, of this whole effort. >>Yeah. Jeff, that's exactly it, which is the way that the agile team measures their own way of working is very different from the way that you measure business outcomes. The business outcomes are in terms of how happy your customers are, but are you innovating fast enough to keep up with the pace of a rapidly changing economy, rapidly changing market. And those are, those are all around the customer. And so what I learned on this long journey of supporting many organizations transformations and having them try to apply those principles of agile and dev ops, that those are not enough, those measures technical practices, those measured sort of technical excellence of bringing code to the market. They don't actually measure business outcomes. And so I realized that it really was much more around having these entwined flow metrics that are customer centric and business centric and market centric where we need it to go. Right. >>So I want to shift gears a little bit and talk about your book because you're also a bestselling author, a project, a product, and, and, and you, you brought up this concept in your book called the flow framework. And it's really interesting to me cause I know, you know, flow on one hand is kind of a workflow and a process flow and, and you know, that's how things get done and, and, and embrace the flow. On the other hand, you know, everyone now in, in a little higher level existential way is trying to get into the flow right into the workflow and, you know, not be interrupted and get into a state where you're kind of at your highest productivity, you know, kind of your highest comfort, which flow are you talking about in your book or is it a little bit about, >>Well, that's a great question. It's not what I get asked very often. Just to me, it's absolutely both. So that the thing that we want to get to, we've learned how to master individual flow. That is this beautiful book by me, how he teaches me how he does a beautiful Ted talk by him as well about how we can take control of our own flow. So my question with the book with project replies, how can we bring that to entire teams and really entire organizations? How can we have everyone contributing to a customer outcome? And this is really what if you go to the biz ops manifesto, it says, I focus on outcomes on using data to drive whether we're delivering those outcomes rather than a focus on proxy metrics, such as, how quickly did we implement this feature? No, it's really how much value did the customer go to the feature and how quickly did you learn and how quickly did you use that data to drive to that next outcome? >>Really that with companies like Netflix and Amazon have mastered, how do we get that to every large organization, every it organization and make everyone be a software innovator. So it's to bring that co that concept of flow to these entwined value streams. And the fascinating thing is we've actually seen the data. We've been able to study a lot of value streams. We see when flow increases, when organizations deliver value to a customer faster, developers actually become more happy. So things like the employee net promoter scores rise, and we've got empirical data for this. So the beautiful thing to me is that we've actually been able to combine these two things and see the results in the data that you increase flow to the customer. Your developers are more happy. >>I love it, right, because we're all more, we're all happier when we're in the flow and we're all more productive when we're in the flow. So I, that is a great melding of, of two concepts, but let's jump into the, into the manifesto itself a little bit. And, you know, I love that, you know, took this approach really of having kind of four key values and then he gets 12 key principles. And I just want to read a couple of these values because when you read them, it sounds pretty brain dead. Right? Of course. Right. Of course you should focus on business outcomes. Of course you should have trust and collaboration. Of course you should have database decision making processes and not just intuition or, you know, whoever's the loudest person in the room, uh, and to learn and respond and pivot. But what's the value of actually just putting them on a piece of paper, because again, this is not this, these are all good, positive things, right? When somebody reads these to you or tells you these are sticks it on the wall, of course. But unfortunately of course isn't always enough. >>No. And I think what's happened is some of these core principles originally from the agile manifesto two decades ago, uh, the whole dev ops movement of the last decade of flow feedback and continue learning has been key. But a lot of organizations, especially the ones that are undergoing digital transformations have actually gone a very different way, right? The way that they measure value in technology and innovation is through costs for many organizations. The way that they actually are looking at that they're moving to cloud is actually as a reduction in cost. Whereas the right way of looking at moving to cloud is how much more quickly can we get to the value to the customer? How quickly can we learn from that? And how quickly can we drive the next business outcome? So really the key thing is, is to move away from those old ways of doing things, a funny projects and cost centers, uh, to actually funding and investing in outcomes and measuring outcomes through these flow metrics, which in the end are your fast feedback and how quickly you're innovating for your customer. >>So these things do seem, you know, very obvious when you look at them. But the key thing is what you need to stop doing to focus on these. You need to actually have accurate realtime data of how much value your phone to the customer every week, every month, every quarter. And if you don't have that, your decisions are not driven on data. If you don't know what your boggling like is, and this is something that in decades of manufacturing, a car manufacturers, other manufacturers, master, they always know where the bottom back in their production processes. You ask a random CIO when a global 500 company where their bottleneck is, and you won't get a clear answer because there's not that level of understanding. So let's, you actually follow these principles. You need to know exactly where you fall. And I guess because that's, what's making your developers miserable and frustrated around having them context, which on thrash. So it, the approach here is important and we have to stop doing these other things, >>Right? There's so much there to unpack. I love it. You know, especially the cloud conversation, because so many people look at it wrong as, as, as a cost saving device, as opposed to an innovation driver and they get stuck, they get stuck in the literal and the, and you know, I think at the same thing, always about Moore's law, right? You know, there's a lot of interesting real tech around Moore's law and the increasing power of microprocessors, but the real power, I think in Moore's laws is the attitudinal change in terms of working in a world where you know that you've got all this power and what you build and design. I think it's funny to your, your comment on the flow and the bottleneck, right? Cause, cause we know manufacturing, as soon as you fix one bottleneck, you move to your next one, right? You always move to your next point of failure. So if you're not fixing those things, you know, you're not, you're not increasing that speed down the line, unless you can identify where that bottleneck is or no matter how many improvements you make to the rest of the process, it's still going to get hung up on that one spot. >>That's exactly it. And you also make it sound so simple, but again, if you don't have the data driven visibility of where that bottom line is, and these bottlenecks are adjusted to say defense just whack them. All right. So we need to understand is the bottleneck because our security reviews are taking too long and stopping us from getting value for the customer. If it's that automate that process. And then you move on to the next bottleneck, which might actually be that deploying yourself into the cloud. It's taking too long. But if you don't take that approach of going flow first, rather than again, that sort of cost reduction. First, you have to think of the approach of customer centricity and you only focused on optimizing costs. Your costs will increase and your flow will slow down. And this is just one of these fascinating things. >>Whereas if you focus on getting closer to the customer and reducing your cycles out on getting value, your flow time from six months to two weeks or two, one week or two event, as we see with the tech giants, you actually can both lower your costs and get much more value for us to get that learning loop going. So I think I've, I've seen all these cloud deployments and one of the things happened that delivered almost no value because there was such big bottlenecks upfront in the process and actually the hosting and the AP testing was not even possible with all of those inefficiencies. So that's why going float us rather than costs when we started our project versus silky. >>I love that. And, and, and, and it, it begs repeating to that right within the subscription economy, you know, you're on the hook to deliver value every single month because they're paying you every single month. So if you're not on top of how you're delivering value, you're going to get sideways because it's not like they pay a big down payment and a small maintenance fee every month. But once you're in a subscription relationship, you know, you have to constantly be delivering value and upgrading that value because you're constantly taking money from the customer. So it's such a different kind of relationship than kind of the classic, you know, big bang with a maintenance agreement on the back end really important. Yeah. >>And I think in terms of industry shifts that that's, it that's, what's catalyzed. This industry shift is in this SAS and subscription economy. If you're not delivering more and more value to your customers, someone else's, and they're winning the business, not you. So, one way we know is to delight our customers with great user experience as well. That really is based on how many features you delivered or how much, how much, how many quality improvements or scalar performance improvements we delivered. So the problem is, and this is what the business manifesto, as well as the flow frame of touch on is if you can't measure how much value you deliver to a customer, what are you measuring? You just backed again, measuring costs, and that's not a measure of value. So we have to shift quickly away from measuring costs to measuring value, to survive. And in the subscription economy, >>We could go for days and days and days. I want to shift gears a little bit into data and, and a data driven decision making a data driven organization cause right day has been talked about for a long time, the huge big data meme with, with Hadoop over, over several years and, and data warehouses and data lakes and data oceans and data swamps. And you can go on and on and on. It's not that easy to do, right? And at the same time, the proliferation of data is growing exponentially. We're just around the corner from, from IOT and five G. So now the accumulation of data at machine scale, again, is this gonna overwhelm? And one of the really interesting principles, uh, that I wanted to call out and get your take right, is today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be augmented by machine learning and artificial intelligence. I wonder if you can, again, you've got some great historical perspective, um, reflect on how hard it is to get the right data, to get the data in the right context, and then to deliver it to the decision makers and then trust the decision makers to actually make the data and move that down. You know, it's kind of this democratization process into more and more people and more and more frontline jobs making more and more of these little decisions every day. >>Yeah. I definitely think the front parts of what you said are where the promises of big data have completely fallen on their face into the swamps as, as you mentioned, because if you don't have the data in the right format, you've cannot connect, collected that the right way you want it, that way, the right way you can't use human or machine learning on it effectively. And there've been the number of data where, how has this in a typical enterprise organization and the sheer investment is tremendous, but the amount of intelligence being extracted from those is, is, is a very big problem. So the key thing that I've noticed is that if you can model your value streams, so you actually understand how you're innovating, how you're measuring the delivery of value and how long that takes, what is your time to value through these metrics like full time? >>You can actually use both the intelligence that you've got around the table and push that down as well, as far as getting to the organization, but you can actually start using that those models to understand and find patterns and detect bottlenecks that might be surprising, right? Well, you can detect interesting bottlenecks when you shift to work from home. We detected all sorts of interesting bottlenecks in our own organization that were not intuitive to me that have to do with, you know, more senior people being overloaded and creating bottlenecks where they didn't exist. Whereas we thought we were actually an organization that was very good at working from home because of our open source roots. So the data is highly complex. Software value streams are extremely complicated. And the only way to really get the proper analysts and data is to model it properly and then to leverage these machine learning and AI techniques that we have. But that front part of what you said is where organizations are just extremely immature in what I've seen, where they've got data from all their tools, but not modeled in the right way. Right, right. >>Right. Well, all right. So before I let you go, you know, let's say you get a business leader. He, he buys in, he reads the manifesto, he signs on the dotted line and he says, Mick, how do I get started? I want to be more aligned with the, with the development teams. I know I'm in a very competitive space. We need to be putting out new software features and engage with our customers. I want to be more data-driven how do I get started? Well, you know, what's the biggest inhibitor for most people to get started and get some early wins, which we know is always the key to success in any kind of a new initiative. >>Right? So I think you can reach out to us through the website, uh, for the manifesto. But the key thing is just, it's definitely set up it's to get started and to get the key wins. So take a product value stream. That's mission critical if it'd be on your mobile and web experiences or part of your cloud modernization platform where your analytics pipeline, but take that and actually apply these principles to it and measure the end to end flow of value. Make sure you have a value metric that everyone is on the same page on, but the people on the development teams that people in leadership all the way up to the CEO, and one of the, where I encourage you to start is actually that end to end flow time, right? That is the number one metric. That is how you measure it, whether you're getting the benefit of your cloud modernization, that is the one metric that when the people I respect tremendously put into his cloud for CEOs, the metric, the one, the one way to measure innovation. So basically take these principles, deploy them on one product value stream measure, Antonin flow time, uh, and then you'll actually be well on your path to transforming and to applying the concepts of agile and dev ops all the way to, to the, to the way >>You're offering model. >>Well, Mick really great tips, really fun to catch up. I look forward to a time when we can actually sit across the table and, and get into this. Cause I just, I just love the perspective and, you know, you're very fortunate to have that foundational, that foundational base coming from Xerox park and they get, you know, it's, it's a very magical place with a magical history. So to, to incorporate that into, continue to spread that well, uh, you know, good for you through the book and through your company. So thanks for sharing your insight with us today. >>Thanks so much for having me, Jeff. Absolutely. >>All right. And go to the biz ops manifesto.org, read it, check it out. If you want to sign it, sign it. They'd love to have you do it. Stay with us for continuing coverage of the unveiling of the business manifesto on the cube. I'm Jeff. Rick. Thanks for watching. See you next time >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage, a biz ops manifesto unveiled brought to you by biz ops coalition. >>Hey, welcome back. You're ready. Jeff Frick here with the cube for our ongoing coverage of the big unveil. It's the biz ops manifesto manifesto unveil. And we're going to start that again from the top three And a Festo >>Five, four, three, two. >>Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with the cube come to you from our Palo Alto studios today for a big, big reveal. We're excited to be here. It's the biz ops manifesto unveiling a thing's been in the works for a while and we're excited to have our next guest. One of the, really the powers behind this whole effort. And he's joining us from Boston it's surge, Lucio, the vice president, and general manager enterprise software division at Broadcom surge. Great to see you. >>Hi, good to see you, Jeff. Glad to be here. >>Absolutely. So you've been in this business for a very long time. You've seen a lot of changes in technology. What is the biz ops manifesto? What is this coalition all about? Why do we need this today and in 2020? >>Yeah. So, so I've been in this business for close to 25 years, right? So about 20 years ago, the agile manifesto was created. And the goal of the agile manifesto was really to address the uncertainty around software development and the inability to predict the efforts to build software. And, uh, if you, if you roll that kind of 20 years later, and if you look at the current state of the industry of the product, the project management Institute, estimates that we're wasting about a million dollars, every 20 seconds in digital transformation initiatives that do not deliver on business results. In fact, we were recently served a third of the, a, a number of executives in partnership with Harvard >>Business review and 77% of those executives think that one of the key challenges that they have is really the collaboration between business and it, and that that's been kind of a case for, uh, almost 20 years now. Um, so the, the, the key challenge that we're faced with is really that we need a new approach. And many of the players in the industry, including ourselves have been using different terms, right? Some are being, are talking about value stream management. Some are talking about software delivery management. If you look at the site, reliability engineering movement, in many ways, it embodies a lot of these kind of concepts and principles. So we believed that it became really imperative for us to crystallize around, could have one concept. And so in many ways, the, a, the BizOps concept and the BizOps manifesto are bringing together a number of ideas, which has been emerging in the last five years or so, and, and defining the key values and principles to finally help these organizations truly transform and become digital businesses. And so the hope is that by joining our forces and defining public key principles and values, we can help the industry, uh, not just, uh, by, you know, providing them with support, but also tools and consulting that is required for them to truly achieve the kind of transformation that everybody's taking. >>Right. Right. So COVID now we're six months into it, approximately seven months into it. Um, a lot of pain, a lot of bad stuff still happening. We've got a ways to go, but one of the things that on the positive side, right, and you've seen all the memes and social media is, is a driver of digital transformation and a driver of change. Cause we had this light switch moment in the middle of March, and there was no more planning. There was no more conversation. You've suddenly got remote workforces, everybody's working from home and you got to go, right. So the reliance on these tools increases dramatically, but I'm curious, you know, kind of short of, of the beginnings of this effort in short of kind of COVID, which, you know, came along unexpectedly. I mean, what were those inhibitors because we've been making software for a very long time, right? The software development community has, has adopted kind of rapid change and, and iterative, uh, delivery and, and sprints, what was holding back the connection with the business side to make sure that those investments were properly aligned with outcomes. >>Well, so, so you have to understand that it is, is kind of a its own silos. And traditionally it has been treated as a cost center within large organizations and not as a value center. And so as a result, kind of a, the traditional dynamic between it and the business is basically one of a kind of supplier up to kind of a business. Um, and you know, if you go back to, uh, I think you'll unmask a few years ago, um, basically at this concept of the machines to build the machines and you went as far as saying that, uh, the, the machines or the production line is actually the product. So, uh, meaning that the core of the innovation is really about, uh, building, could it be engine to deliver on the value? And so in many ways, you know, we, we have missed on this shift from, um, kind of it becoming this kind of value center within the enterprises and end. >>He talks about culture. Now, culture is a, is a sum total of behaviors. And the reality is that if you look at it, especially in the last decade, uh, we've agile with dev ops with, um, I bring infrastructures, uh, it's, it's way more volatile today than it was 10 years ago. And so the, when you start to look at the velocity of the data, the volume of data, the variety of data to analyze the system, um, it's, it's very challenging for it to actually even understand and optimize its own processes, let alone, um, to actually include business as sort of an integral part of kind of a delivery chain. And so it's both kind of a combination of, of culture, um, which is required, uh, as well as tools, right? To be able to start to bring together all these data together, and then given the volume of variety of philosophy of the data. Uh, we have to apply some core technologies, which have only really, truly emerged in the last five to 10 years around machine learning and analytics. And so it's really kind of a combination of those freaks, which are coming together today, truly out organizations kind of get to the next level. Right, >>Right. So let's talk about the manifesto. Let's talk about, uh, the coalition, uh, the BizOps coalition. I just liked that you put down these really simple, you know, kind of straightforward core values. You guys have four core values that you're highlighting, you know, business outcomes, over individual projects and outputs, trust, and collaboration, oversight, load teams, and organizations, data driven decisions, what you just talked about, uh, you know, over opinions and judgment and learned, respond and pivot. I mean, surgery sounds like pretty basic stuff, right? I mean, aren't, isn't everyone working to these values already. And I think he touched on it on culture, right? Trust and collaboration, data driven decisions. I mean, these are fundamental ways that people must run their business today, or the person that's across the street, that's doing it. It's going to knock them out right off their block. >>Yeah. So that's very true. But, uh, so I'll, I'll mention an hour survey. We did, uh, I think about six months ago and it was in partnership with, uh, with, uh, an industry analyst and we serve at a, again, a number of it executives to understand only we're tracking business outcomes. I'm going to get the software executives, it executives we're tracking business outcomes. And the, there were less than 15% of these executives were actually tracking the outcomes of the software delivery. And you see that every day. Right? So in my own teams, for instance, we've been adopting a lot of these core principles in the last year or so, and we've uncovered that 16% of our resources were basically aligned around initiatives, which are not strategic for us. Um, I take another example, for instance, one of our customers in the, uh, in the airline industry and Harvard, for instance, that a number of, uh, um, that they had software issues that led to people searching for flights and not returning any kind of availability. >>And yet, um, you know, the it teams, whether it's operation software environments were completely oblivious to that because they were completely blindsided to it. And so the connectivity between kind of the inwards metrics that RT is using, whether it's database time, cycle time, or whatever metric we use in it are typically completely divorced from the business metrics. And so at its core, it's really about starting to align the business metrics with the, the, the software delivery chain, right? This, uh, the system, which is really a core differentiator for these organizations. It's about connecting those two things and starting to, um, infuse some of the agile culture and principles. Um, that's emerged from the software side into the business side. Um, of course the lean movement and other movements have started to change some of these dynamics on the business side. And so I think this, this is the moment where we are starting to see kind of the imperative to transform. Now, you know, Covina obviously has been a key driver for that. The, um, the technology is right to start to be able to weave data together and really kind of, uh, also the cultural shifts, uh, Prue agile through dev ops through, uh, the SRE movement, uh frulein um, business transformation, all these things are coming together and that are really creating kind of the conditions for the BizOps manifestor to exist, >>Uh, Clayton Christianson, great, uh, Harvard professor innovator's dilemma might steal my all time. Favorite business books, you know, talks about how difficult it is for incumbents to react to, to disruptive change, right? Because they're always working on incremental change cause that's what their customers are asking for. And there's a good ROI when you talk about, you know, companies not measuring the right thing. I mean, clearly it has some portion of their budget that has to go to keeping the lights on, right. That that's always the case, but hopefully that's an ever decreasing percentage of their total activity. So, you know, what should people be measuring? I mean, what are kind of the new metrics, um, in, in biz ops that drive people to be looking at the right things, measuring the right things and subsequently making the right decisions, investment decisions on whether they should do, you know, move project a along or project B. >>So there, there are only two things, right? So, so I think what you're talking about is portfolio management, investment management, right. And, um, which, which is a key challenge, right? Um, in my own experience, right? Uh, driving strategy or a large scale kind of software organization for years, um, it's very difficult to even get kind of a base data as to who is doing what, uh, um, I mean, some of our largest customers we're engaged with right now are simply trying to get a very simple answer, which is how many people do I have and that specific initiative at any point in time and just tracking that information is extremely difficult. So, and, and again, back to a product project management Institute, um, they're, they've estimated that on average, it organizations have anywhere between 10 to 20% of their resources focused on initiatives, which are not strategically aligned. >>So that's one dimension on portfolio management. I think the key aspect though, that we are really keen on is really around kind of the alignment of a business metrics to the it metrics. Um, so I'll use kind of two simple examples, right? And my background is around quality. And so I've always believed that fitness for purpose is really kind of a key, um, uh, philosophy if you will. And so if you start to think about quality as fitness for purpose, you start to look at it from a customer point of view, right. And fitness for purpose for core banking application or mobile application are different, right? So the definition of a business value that you're trying to achieve is different. Um, and so the, and yet, if you look at our, it, operations are operating, they were using kind of a same type of, uh, kind of inward metrics, uh, like a database of time or a cycle time, or what is my point of velocity, right? >>And, uh, and so the challenge really is this inward facing metrics that it is using, which are divorced from ultimately the outcome. And so, you know, if I'm, if I'm trying to build a poor banking application, my core metric is likely going to be uptime, right? If I'm trying to build a mobile application or maybe your social mobile app, it's probably going to be engagement. And so what you want is for everybody across it, to look at these metric, and what's hard, the metrics within the software delivery chain, which ultimately contribute to that business metric and some cases cycle time may be completely irrelevant, right? Again, my core banking app, maybe I don't care about cycle time. And so it's really about aligning those metrics and be able to start to differentiate, um, the key challenges you mentioned, uh, around the, the, um, uh, around the disruption that we see is, or the investors is the dilemma now is really around the fact that many it organizations are essentially applying the same approaches of, for innovation, right, for basically scrap work, then they would apply to kind of over more traditional projects. And so, you know, there's been a lot of talk about two-speed it, and yes, it exists, but in reality are really organizations, um, truly differentiating, um, all of the operate, their, their projects and products based on the outcomes that they're trying to achieve. And this is really where BizOps is trying to affect. >>I love that, you know, again, it doesn't seem like brain surgery, but focus on the outcomes, right. And it's horses for courses, as you said, this project, you know, what you're measuring and how you define success, isn't necessarily the same as, as on this other project. So let's talk about some of the principles we've talked about the values, but, you know, I think it's interesting that, that, that the BizOps coalition, you know, just basically took the time to write these things down and they don't seem all that, uh, super insightful, but I guess you just gotta get them down and have them on paper and have them in front of your face. But I want to talk about, you know, one of the key ones, which you just talked about, which is changing requirements, right. And working in a dynamic situation, which is really what's driven, you know, this, the software to change in software development, because, you know, if you're in a game app and your competitor comes out with a new blue sword, you've got to come out with a new blue sword. >>So whether you had that on your Kanban wall or not. So it's, it's really this embracing of the speed of change and, and, and, and making that, you know, the rule, not the exception. I think that's a phenomenal one. And the other one you talked about is data, right? And that today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So informed decisions must be generated by machine learning and AI, and, you know, in the, the big data thing with Hadoop, you know, started years ago, but we are seeing more and more that people are finally figuring it out, that it's not just big data, and it's not even generic machine learning or artificial intelligence, but it's applying those particular data sets and that particular types of algorithms to a specific problem, to your point, to try to actually reach an objective, whether that's, you know, increasing the, your average ticket or, you know, increasing your checkout rate with, with, with shopping carts that don't get left behind and these types of things. So it's a really different way to think about the world in the good old days, probably when you got started, when we had big, giant, you know, MRDs and PRDs and sat down and coded for two years and came out with a product release and hopefully not too many patches subsequently to that. >>It's interesting. Right. Um, again, back to one of these surveys that we did with, uh, with about 600, the ITA executives, and, uh, and, and we, we purposely designed those questions to be pretty open. Um, and, and one of them was really role requirements and, uh, and it was really a wrong kind of what do you, what is the best approach? What is your preferred approach towards requirements? And if I remember correctly over 80% of the it executives set that the best approach they'll prefer to approach is for requirements to be completely defined before software development starts. Let me pause there where 20 years after the agile manifesto, right? And for 80% of these idea executives to basically claim that the best approach is for requirements to be fully baked before salt, before software development starts, basically shows that we still have a very major issue. >>And again, our hypothesis in working with many organizations is that the key challenge is really the boundary between business and it, which is still very much contract based. If you look at the business side, they basically are expecting for it deliver on time on budget, right. But what is the incentive for it to actually delivering all the business outcomes, right? How often is it measured on the business outcomes and not on an SLA or on a budget type criteria. And so that, that's really the fundamental shift that we need to, we really need to drive up as an industry. Um, and you know, we, we talk about kind of this, this imperative for organizations to operate that's one, and back to the innovator's dilemma. The key difference between these larger organization is, is really kind of a, if you look at the amount of capital investment that they can put into pretty much anything, why are they losing compared to, um, you know, startups? What, why is it that, uh, more than 40% of, uh, personal loans today or issued not by your traditional brick and mortar banks, but by, um, startups? Well, the reason, yes, it's the traditional culture of doing incremental changes and not disrupting ourselves, which Christiansen covered at length, but it's also the inability to really fundamentally change kind of a dynamic picture. We can business it and, and, and partner right. To, to deliver on a specific business outcome. Right. >>I love that. That's a great, that's a great summary. And in fact, getting ready for this interview, I saw you mentioning another thing where, you know, the, the problem with the agile development is that you're actually now getting more silos because you have all these autonomous people working, you know, kind of independently. So it's even a harder challenge for, for the business leaders to, to, to, as you said, to know, what's actually going on, but, but certainly I w I want to close, um, and talk about the coalition. Um, so clearly these are all great concepts. These are concepts you want to apply to your business every day. Why the coalition, why, you know, take these concepts out to a broader audience, including your, your competition and, and the broader industry to say, Hey, we, as a group need to put a stamp of approval on these concepts, values, these principles. >>So, first I think we, we want, um, everybody to realize that we are all talking about the same things, the same concepts. I think we were all from our own different vantage point, realizing that, um, things after change, and again, back to, you know, whether it's value stream management or site reliability engineering, or biz ops, we're all kind of using slightly different languages. Um, and so I think one of the important aspects of BizOps is for us, all of us, whether we're talking about, you know, consulting agile transformation experts, uh, whether we're talking about vendors, right, provides kind of tools and technologies, or these large enterprises to transform for all of us to basically have kind of a reference that lets us speak around kind of, um, in a much more consistent way. The second aspect is for, to me is for, um, these concepts to start to be embraced, not just by us or trying, or, you know, vendors, um, system integrators, consulting firms, educators, thought leaders, but also for some of our old customers to start to become evangelists of their own in the industry. >>So we, our, our objective with the coalition needs to be pretty, pretty broad. Um, and our hope is by, by starting to basically educate, um, our, our joint customers or partners, that we can start to really foster these behaviors and start to really change, uh, some of dynamics. So we're very pleased at if you look at, uh, some of the companies which have joined the, the, the, the manifesto. Um, so we have vendors and suggest desktop or advance, or, um, uh, PagerDuty for instance, or even planned view, uh, one of my direct competitors, um, but also thought leaders like Tom Davenport or, uh, or cap Gemini or, um, um, smaller firms like, uh, business agility, institutes, or agility elf. Um, and so our, our goal really is to start to bring together, uh, thought leaders, people who have been LP, larger organizations do digital transformation vendors, were providing the technologies that many of these organizations use to deliver on these digital preservation and for all of us to start to provide the kind of, uh, education support and tools that the industry needs. Yeah, >>That's great surge. And, uh, you know, congratulations to you and the team. I know this has been going on for a while, putting all this together, getting people to sign onto the manifesto, putting the coalition together, and finally today getting to unveil it to the world in a little bit more of a public, uh, opportunity. So again, you know, really good values, really simple principles, something that, that, uh, shouldn't have to be written down, but it's nice cause it is, and now you can print it out and stick it on your wall. So thank you for, uh, for sharing this story. And again, congrats to you and the team. Thank you. Appreciate it. My pleasure. Alrighty, surge. If you want to learn more about the biz ops, Manifesta go to biz ops manifesto.org, read it, and you can sign it and you can stay here for more coverage. I'm the cube of the biz ops manifesto unveiled. Thanks for watching. See you next time >>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of this ops manifesto unveiled and brought to you by >>This obstacle volition. Hey, welcome back, everybody Jeffrey here with the cube. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the biz ops manifesto unveiling. It's been in the works for awhile, but today's the day that it actually kind of come out to the, to the public. And we're excited to have a real industry luminary here to talk about what's going on, why this is important and share his perspective. And we're happy to have from Cape Cod, I believe is Tom Davenport. He's a distinguished author and professor at Babson college. We could go on, he's got a lot of great titles and, and really illuminary in the area of big data and analytics Thomas. Great to see you. >>Thanks Jeff. Happy to be here with you. >>Great. So let's just jump into it, you know, and getting ready for this. I came across your LinkedIn posts. I think you did earlier this summer in June and right off the bat, the first sentence just grabbed my attention. I'm always interested in new attempts to address longterm issues, uh, in how technology works within businesses, biz ops. What did you see in biz ops, uh, that, that kind of addresses one of these really big longterm problems? >>Well, yeah, but the longterm problem is that we've had a poor connection between business people and it people between business objectives and the, it solutions that address them. This has been going on, I think since the beginning of information technology and sadly it hasn't gone away. And so biz ops is a new attempt to deal with that issue with a, you know, a new framework, eventually a broad set of solutions that increase the likelihood that will actually solve a business problem with an it capability. >>Right. You know, it's interesting to compare it with like dev ops, which I think a lot of people are probably familiar with, which was, you know, built around, uh, agile software development and a theory that we want to embrace change that that changes. Okay. And we want to be able to iterate quickly and incorporate that. And that's been happening in the software world for, for 20 plus years. What's taken so long to get that to the business side, because as the pace of change has changed on the software side, you know, that's a strategic issue in terms of execution, the business side that they need now to change priorities. And, you know, there's no PRDs and MRDs and big, giant strategic plans that sit on the shelf for five years. That's just not the way business works anymore. It took a long time to get here. >>Yeah, it did. And, you know, there had been previous attempts to make a better connection between business and it, there was the so called strategic alignment framework that a couple of friends of mine from Boston university developed, I think more than 20 years ago, but you know, now we have better technology for creating that linkage. And the, you know, the idea of kind of ops oriented frameworks is pretty pervasive now. So I think it's time for another serious attempt at it. >>And do you think doing it this way, right. With the, with the BizOps coalition, you know, getting a collection of, of, of kind of likeminded individuals and companies together, and actually even having a manifesto, which we're making this declarative statement of, of principles and values, you think that's what it takes to kind of drive this kind of beyond the experiment and actually, you know, get it done and really start to see some results in, in, uh, in production in the field. >>I think certainly no one vendor organization can pull this off single handedly. It does require a number of organizations collaborating and working together. So I think our coalition is a good idea and a manifesto is just a good way to kind of lay out what you see as the key principles of the idea. And that makes it much easier for everybody to understand and act on. >>I, I think it's just, it's really interesting having, you know, having them written down on paper and having it just be so clearly articulated both in terms of the, of the values as well as, as the, uh, the principles and the values, you know, business outcomes matter trust and collaboration, data-driven decisions, which is the number three of four, and then learn, respond and pivot. It doesn't seem like those should have to be spelled out so clearly, but, but obviously it helps to have them there. You can stick them on the wall and kind of remember what your priorities are, but you're the data guy. You're the analytics guy, uh, and a big piece of this is data and analytics and moving to data driven decisions. And principle number seven says, you know, today's organizations generate more data than humans can process and informed decisions can be augmented by machine learning and artificial intelligence right up your alley. You know, you've talked a number of times on kind of the mini stages of analytics. Um, and how has that evolved over over time, you know, as you think of analytics and machine learning, driving decisions beyond supporting decisions, but actually starting to make decisions in machine time. What's that, what's that thing for you? What does that make you, you know, start to think, wow, this is this going to be pretty significant. >>Yeah. Well, you know, this has been a longterm interest of mine. Um, the last generation of AI, I was very interested in expert systems. And then, um, I think, uh, more than 10 years ago, I wrote an article about automated decision-making using what was available then, which was rule-based approaches. Um, but you know, this addresses an issue that we've always had with analytics and AI. Um, you know, we, we tended to refer to those things as providing decision support, but the problem is that if the decision maker didn't want their support, didn't want to use them in order to make a decision, they didn't provide any value. And so the nice thing about automating decisions, um, with now contemporary AI tools is that we can ensure that data and analytics get brought into the decision without any possible disconnection. Now, I think humans still have something to add here, and we often will need to examine how that decision is being made and maybe even have the ability to override it. But in general, I think at least for, you know, repetitive tactical decisions, um, involving a lot of data, we want most of those, I think to be at least, um, recommended if not totally made by an algorithm or an AI based system. And that I believe would add to, um, the quality and the precision and the accuracy of decisions and in most organizations, >>No, I think, I think you just answered my next question before I, before I asked it, you know, we had dr. Robert Gates on the former secretary of defense on a few years back, and we were talking about machines and machines making decisions. And he said at that time, you know, the only weapon systems, uh, that actually had an automated trigger on it were on the North Korea and South Korea border. Um, everything else, as you said, had to go through a sub person before the final decision was made. And my question is, you know, what are kind of the attributes of the decision that enable us to more easily automated? And then how do you see that kind of morphing over time, both as the data to support that as well as our comfort level, um, enables us to turn more and more actual decisions over to the machine? >>Well, yeah, as I suggested we need, um, data and the data that we have to kind of train our models has to be high quality and current, and we need to know the outcomes of that data. You know, um, most machine learning models, at least in business are supervised. And that means we need to have labeled outcomes in the, in the training data. But I, you know, um, the pandemic that we're living through is a good illustration of the fact that, that the data also have to be reflective of current reality. And, you know, one of the things that we're finding out quite frequently these days is that, um, the data that we have do not reflect, you know, what it's like to do business in a pandemic. Um, I wrote a little piece about this recently with Jeff cam at wake forest university, we call it data science quarantined, and we interviewed with somebody who said, you know, it's amazing what eight weeks of zeros will do to your demand forecast. We just don't really know what happens in a pandemic. Um, our models maybe have to be put on the shelf for a little while and until we can develop some new ones or we can get some other guidelines into making decisions. So I think that's one of the key things with automated decision making. We have to make sure that the data from the past and that's all we have of course, is a good guide to, you know, what's happening in the present and the future as far as we understand it. >>Yeah. I used to joke when we started this calendar year 2020, it was finally the year that we know everything with the benefit of hindsight, but I turned down 20, 20 a year. We found out we actually know nothing and everything and thought we knew, but I want to, I want to follow up on that because you know, it did suddenly change everything, right? We've got this light switch moment. Everybody's working from home now we're many, many months into it, and it's going to continue for a while. I saw your interview with Bernard Marr and you had a really interesting comment that now we have to deal with this change. We don't have a lot of data and you talked about hold fold or double down. And, and I can't think of a more, you know, kind of appropriate metaphor for driving the value of the biz ops when now your whole portfolio strategy, um, these to really be questioned and, and, you know, you have to be really, uh, well, uh, executing on what you are, holding, what you're folding and what you're doubling down with this completely new environment. >>Well, yeah, and I hope I did this in the interview. I would like to say that I came up with that term, but it actually came from a friend of mine. Who's a senior executive at Genpact. And, um, I, um, used it mostly to talk about AI and AI applications, but I think you could, you could use it much more broadly to talk about your entire sort of portfolio of digital projects. You need to think about, well, um, given some constraints on resources and a difficult economy for a while, which of our projects do we want to keep going on pretty much the way we were and which ones are not that necessary anymore? You see a lot of that in AI, because we had so many pilots, somebody told me, you know, we've got more pilots around here than O'Hare airport and, and AI. Um, and then, but the ones that involve doubled down, they're even more important to you. They are, you know, a lot of organizations have found this out, um, in the pandemic on digital projects, it's more and more important for customers to be able to interact with you, um, digitally. And so you certainly wouldn't want to cancel those projects or put them on hold. So you double down on them and get them done faster and better. Right, >>Right. Uh, another, another thing that came up in my research that, that you quoted, um, was, was from Jeff Bezos, talking about the great bulk of what we do is quietly, but meaningfully improving core operations. You know, I think that is so core to this concept of not AI and machine learning and kind of the general sense, which, which gets way too much buzz, but really applied right. Applied to a specific problem. And that's where you start to see the value. And, you know, the, the BizOps, uh, manifesto is, is, is calling it out in this particular process. But I'd love to get your perspective as you know, you speak generally about this topic all the time, but how people should really be thinking about where are the applications where I can apply this technology to get direct business value. >>Yeah, well, you know, even talking about automated decisions, um, uh, the kind of once in a lifetime decisions, uh, the ones that, um, ag Lafley, the former CEO of Procter and gamble used to call the big swing decisions. You only get a few of those. He said in your tenure as CEO, those are probably not going to be the ones that you're automating in part because, um, you don't have much data about them. You're only making them a few times and in part, because, um, they really require that big picture thinking and the ability to kind of anticipate the future, that the best human decision makers, um, have. Um, but, um, in general, I think where they, I, the projects that are working well are, you know, what I call the low hanging fruit ones, the, some people even report to it referred to it as boring AI. >>So, you know, sucking data out of a contract in order to compare it to a bill of lading for what arrived at your supply chain companies can save or make a lot of money with that kind of comparison. It's not the most exciting thing, but AI, as you suggested is really good at those narrow kinds of tasks. It's not so good at the, at the really big moonshots, like curing cancer or, you know, figuring out well what's the best stock or bond under all or even autonomous vehicles. Um, we, we made some great progress in that area, but everybody seems to agree that they're not going to be perfect for quite a while, and we really don't want to be driving around on, um, and then very much unless they're, you know, good and all kinds of weather and with all kinds of pedestrian traffic and you know, that sort of thing, right? >>That's funny you bring up contract management. I had a buddy years ago, they had a startup around contract management and I've like, and this was way before we had the compute power today and cloud proliferation. I said, you know, how can you possibly build software around contract management? It's language, it's legal, ease. It's very specific. And he's like, Jeff, we just need to know where's the contract. And when does it expire? And who's the signatory. And he built a business on those, you know, very simple little facts that weren't being covered because their contracts are in people's drawers and files and homes. And Lord only knows. So it's really interesting, as you said, these kind of low hanging fruit opportunities where you can extract a lot of business value without trying to, you know, boil the ocean. >>Yeah. I mean, if you're Amazon, um, uh, Jeff Bezos thinks it's important to have some kind of billion dollar project. And he even says it's important to have a billion dollar failure or two every year. But I think most organizations probably are better off being a little less aggressive and, you know, sticking to, um, what AI has been doing for a long time, which is, you know, making smarter decisions based on, based on data. >>Right? So Tom, I want to shift gears one more time before, before we let you go on, on kind of a new topic for you, not really new, but you know, not, not a, the vast majority of, of your publications and that's the new way to work, you know, as, as the pandemic hit in mid March, right. And we had this light switch moment, everybody had to work from home and it was, you know, kind of crisis and get everybody set up. Well, you know, now we're five months, six months, seven months. A number of companies have said that people are not going to be going back to work for a while. And so we're going to continue on this for a while. And then even when it's not what it is now, it's not going to be what it was before. So, you know, I wonder, and I know you, you, uh, you teased, you're working on a new book, you know, some of your thoughts on, you know, kind of this new way to work and, and, and the human factors in this new, this new kind of reality that we're kind of evolving into, I guess. >>Yeah. I missed was an interest of mine. I think, um, back in the nineties, I wrote an article called, um, a coauthored, an article called two cheers for the virtual office. And, you know, it was just starting to emerge. Then some people were very excited about it. Some people were skeptical and, uh, we said two cheers rather than three cheers because clearly there's some shortcomings. And, you know, I keep seeing these pop up. It's great that we can work from our homes. It's great that we can, most of what we need to do with a digital interface, but, um, you know, things like innovation and creativity, and certainly, um, uh, a good, um, happy social life kind of requires some face to face contact every now and then. And so I, you know, I think we'll go back to an environment where there is some of that. >>Um, we'll have, um, times when people convene in one place so they can get to know each other face to face and learn from each other that way. And most of the time, I think it's a huge waste of people's time to commute into the office every day and to jump on airplanes, to, to, um, give every little, um, uh, sales call or give every little presentation. Uh, we just have to really narrow down what are the circumstances where face to face contact really matters. And when can we get by with digital? You know, I think one of the things in my current work I'm finding is that even when you have AI based decision making, you really need a good platform in which that all takes place. So in addition to these virtual platforms, we need to develop platforms that kind of structure the workflow for us and tell us what we should be doing next, then make automated decisions when necessary. And I think that ultimately is a big part of biz ops as well. It's not just the intelligence of an AI system, but it's the flow of work that kind of keeps things moving smoothly throughout your organization. >>I think such, such a huge opportunity as you just said, cause I forget the stats on how often we're interrupted with notifications between email texts, Slack, a sauna, Salesforce, the list goes on and on. So, you know, to put an AI layer between the person and all these systems that are begging for attention, you've written a book on the attention economy, which is a whole nother topic, we'll say for another day, you know, it, it really begs, it really begs for some assistance because you know, you just can't get him picked, you know, every two minutes and really get quality work done. It's just not, it's just not realistic. And you know what? I don't think that's a feature that we're looking for. >>I agree. Totally >>Tom. Well, thank you so much for your time. Really enjoyed the conversation. I got to dig into the library. It's very long. So I might start at the attention economy. I haven't read that one. And to me, I think that's the fascinating thing in which we're living. So thank you for your time and, uh, great to see you. >>My pleasure, Jeff. Great to be here. >>All right. He's Tom I'm Jeff. You are watching the continuing coverage of the biz ops manifesto and Vail. Thanks for watching the cube. We'll see you next time.

(upbeat music) >> Welcome to the BizOps Manifesto Power panel talking about, "Embracing Agility Across the Business." I'm Lisa Martin, there are three guests here with me today, to break down this topic. Pierre Viljoen, CTO at Global Head of Enterprise Technology and Governance at HTL Enterprise Studio. Hey Pierre, welcome. >> Thank you >> Lisa: Dave West is also here, the CEO of Scrum.org. Hey Dave, good to have you with us. >> Hi Lisa, hi everybody. >> Lisa: And Serge Lucio is here as well, the general manager of Broadcom's Enterprise Software Division. Hey Serge, good to have you on the program. >> Thank you, good to be here. >> So we're going to be talking about the people and the process and technology requirements that businesses need to adopt to be able to embrace agility across the business. We're going to also be talking a lot about this inaugural BizOps industry research survey, on the state of digital business. A lot of very interesting findings that we're going to go through in the next 20 minutes or so. So the first question guys is, the BizOps survey found that over 519 individuals over five countries business and technology executives. This survey found, most organizations still expect this year to be as challenging as last year. I want you to kind of walk us through why that is, and how is that going to impact digital transformation initiatives? Pierre, we'll start with you, then Dave, then Serge. >> Sure, thank you Lisa. So, I think these days, disruption is no longer an exception. It's kind of become the norm or the rule, in terms of how we operate. And as executives in companies have learned over the last year, with everything that's happened is that, you can only modernize to a point, and then you need to do a little bit more. And what really is needed is for us to understand, going forward, how we're actually going to remodel our business by harnessing the resources that we have in a much more agile way, in a more fluent way, from an organizational perspective. And I think our current midterm goal, probably, is that we're capable of remodeling how we can remove roadblocks. These kinds of roadblocks in the future, and get us in a better position where we are. I don't expect things to change dramatically over the next year. More in line with us making sure that we're more future proof in the way in which we're working. >> We still have remote workers, global uncertainty, the vaccine. Dave, what are your thoughts on the impact of this year on digital transformation initiatives? >> Yeah, it's funny. When I think of, sort of uncertainty and chaos, I think that COVID really started it rolling down a hill, but unfortunately it's literally like rolling down a hill, these chaos and complexity. It's getting faster and faster and harder and harder. We're talking about the new norm, right? What is the new normal? We just don't know. And I think the reality is that most organizations were surprised by the impact of COVID-19 and because of that, they responded very quickly. Many of them, people were working at home, they're looking at their supply chain, looking at localization, all sorts of really important things happen, but very quickly, not very strategically. I think the next few years we're going to see, hopefully, some of that realizing into strategy and actually starting to fundamentally change how the business is looking at the world. We've sort of entered the digital age, Lisa, this next age of innovation, we have moved out of mass production and the age of oil, into something very, very different. And I think those organizations, every organization out there is going to have to get a handle on that and COVID was the wake up, right? And I think the next five years are going to be very interesting. >> I agree with you that that accelerant was, I didn't think of it before as a big ball rolling downhill. And now I don't think I'm going to be able to get that out of my head. But Serge, talk to us about your thoughts, the impacts to digital transformation initiatives. >> Yeah, I think back to what Dave was describing. The big challenge is the uncertainty. Many organizations are faced with, currently, a lot of unknowns about, if and when things will go back to, quote unquote, some kind of normality. And with that kind of uncertainty, there's a lot of challenges to the planning from an investment point of view. So, Dave was talking about a short-term versus long-term Like, a lot of these organizations are basically focused on just getting by over the next 12 months and trying to figure out what needs to happen over the next 12 months. At the same time, there's a lot of challenges with respect to readiness and uncertainty. And so, in that context, you got kind of this tension between, "How much do I invest short term "on basically tactical initiatives, "How do I care about teams? "How do I enable these teams "to deliver in weeks as opposed to months? "And then at the same time, "how do I continue to invest "to fundamentally change my operating model?" And that tension is very real. Within many of the organizations we serve. >> One of the things that the survey found was that most of the respondents were very willing to embrace being more agile in order to be able to better respond to rapidly changing market conditions. But I want to get your opinion on what that actually really means, that willingness to embrace being agile. What does it really mean? And what do organize organizations have to do differently? Pierre, I'll start with you. >> Sure, I think we had a discussion a while back and Dave actually got into something interesting where he said, without quoting a famous sneaker brand, just go out and do it. I think that's probably the most important part of this. Most organizations are struggling to figure out, "How should we embrace Agile? "Should we jump in at full scale now? "Should we be looking Scrum? "Should we be doing Scrum-Falls? "Should we be falling over our own feet?" Nobody knows exactly, what might be the right sector? I think the most important part is to pick up a pair of solid principles that you're going to embrace, start executing on them, start learning as you go, and basically improve as you move forward. Over the last year, we've embraced digital product management quite a lot on our side. And it's had tremendous benefits without us, per se, aiming for those benefits at the end of the day. And these are things that you learn as you go. And if you're going to wait around, analysis paralysis is going to be the killer of Agile at the end of day >> "Just do it," I like that. Good advice. Dave, what are your thoughts? >> Yeah, so, I think that what's really interesting is, Agile has been around for 20 years. The manifesto was signed 20 years ago. Scrum came into the world 25 years ago. All of these sort of Agile approaches, but they were predominantly focused on technology. And I think that one thing that I've noticed, over and over again, is that the realization by C-level executives, level sevens, or whatever they're called, they've realized that it's not about technology. (chuckles) It's great, the technologies. I guess the technology's always worked in this complex world because customers never knew what they wanted. We didn't know how are we going to do it. We'd never worked together before. We didn't know how much it was going to cost. So, because of that (chuckles) we had to work in an agile way in technology. But ultimately, I think, one of the big differences going forward, is going to be that, there I say that intersection of business and technology, that BizOps kind of model that we talked about in the manifesto, and what the survey was really trying to tease out. I think that's really, really going to be interesting. And I don't know what that actually means, in terms of the execution. I hope it means that we're going to see teams better aligned to business outcomes. I hope it means that we're going to actually allow those teams that are actually know what they're approaching to make decisions. I hope it means that planning is going to be more directional rather than task level. I hope it means that we're going to start measuring the success in terms of business outcomes, not in terms of the work that we do. I hope it means all of these things. But we will wait and see, because experience would indicate that after a big disaster, lots of people tend to go back to exactly how they worked before, with that sort of emus kind of mentality or ostrich or whatever things sticks its head in the ground. I don't know. >> Sometimes we just want to go back to when things were safe and normal. But in terms of kind of following on, Dave, what you said, 94%, in this survey, 94% of respondents said we should adopt BizOps to increase competitiveness. So, that willingness is there in a vast majority of the respondents. So, I'd like to get your thoughts on what that willingness actually means and what they need to do differently. >> Yes. The problem is that, I think everybody understand that you have to be agile, right? You need to be able to respond quickly to your customer needs. You need to put the customer at the center of everything you do, right? So, conceptually, everybody understands that. The problem is really the operating model that many of these large organizations are dealing with to this day, right? So, you have these sort of Berkeley, kind of organized organization, with functional roles, specialized roles. And when you think about kind of generally, well, one of the big challenges is that you need to start to think horizontally, right? You need to start to start to think about what kind of value streams and what part of the cross functional teams that need to be organized and integrated to deliver on specific business outcomes. You need to start shifting from the traditional contract-based model that(indistinct) to a model which is much more based on trust, right? And we need to move away from vanity measurements and KPIs that many of the organizations typically lead by, to really focus on one thing and one thing only, which is that business value has been delivered. So, fundamentally, I think it requires a bit of a redesign of the operating model in these organizations. And one where, especially when you have a risk adversed kind of organizations, you need to start to be more accepting of risk, fundamentally. >> More accepting of risk. You brought something up there starts that I want to tackle in the next question with respect to culture. But one of the things that the survey uncovered was an interesting kind of seeming contradiction. The majority of respondents said, "We agreed, digital transformation "is about business outcomes "more than it is about technology." But 62% said, "We're still adopting technology for technology's sake." What does that actually mean? And what's the kind of cultural impact there for organizations to really get that more aligned on the digital transformation and the technology and the business outcomes? Pierre, we'll start with you. >> Sure. So, I think there were a number of reports this year talking about what's happened, what's not happened, and the majority of them focused on the fact that, as tech leaders, for years we've been praying to the gods to get budget approved to do all kinds of modernization activities to our infrastructure, our IT, tools, et cetera. And, lo and behold, the ball comes rolling down the hill, smashes a few things and we basically get some blank checks. So, we run around and we buy a whole bunch of stuff to modernize and to embrace this ability to do things differently. And in that whole process, what we basically did was buy more tools and buy more technology. And in that whole process, we didn't really embrace what it is that we're trying to achieve. So, basically aligning the technology to the actual business requirements getting closer to the customer, being able to understand where our market's moving, how we're capable of reducing the journey, if I can put it that way, and make sure that we're more aligned to where we need to be. So, although a lot of CIOs and CTOs got away with doing a lot of great stuff over the last year and users like me are like, "Ooh! I don't have to worry "about stupid VPNs and things anymore." That all went away. But in the same instance, I didn't really get anything that changed the organizational dynamic, which is a challenge. We still have the fundamental problems we have because the business leaders are not yet embracing the deep monitor of the processes that are supported by the technology. And then driving that in such a way that we can gain more business value which is important. To Serge's previous point, we're doing all these great things but we're not focusing on the incremental value that we're supposed to be getting. >> Dave, did it surprise you that there was this seemingly contradictory response? Yes, it's more about business outcomes and technology, but we're still adopting technology for technology's sake. What are your thoughts on that? And how can organizations actually start to move the needle on that? >> E-comm by cultural change, right? But you do know that your board and your leadership want you to do something, and the easiest thing you can do is buy something. I'm a sort of now an American, so, that's kind of my mantra in life, right? "When in doubt go shopping." Which is fantastic, just for the record. (Lisa laughs) But so, you've got to be seen to be doing something, whether it's replacing a VPN, which is always a fun thing to do, or whether it's getting on Slack. Everyone's going to be on Slack. that's going to help. But actually the core is that, exactly what Serge and Pierre have been saying all along, it's that, "Okay. So what is our business all about? "What are our customers? "what did they actually need? "What do our employees need? "How do we build a better value stream "from customer to the organization? "How do we align our teams to that? "How do we incentivize correctly "both the employees that are working "and our partners that are providing things "in this supply chain. How do we do all of those things?" Ultimately though, that means that we have to take a step back which is a very frustrating thing at the moment. And actually look at what is our business all about? What is the mission of it? Who are the customers? Take a moment to find what those are. And then, soon as we have that, and we don't have to do it. As Pierre said, we don't have to do it completely. We can do it incrementally. Organizations are very inward looking. That is the industrial mindset. That is that paradigm. It's looking, as Serge talked about, silos, "optimizing my department," "optimizing my budget, optimizing my kingdom." And what we're talking about is something that cross cuts all of that. So, the decision making is going to change around where the investments go and that's going to be really, really challenging. So, I'm not surprised, I'm not at all surprised that everybody says we should be doing this. And it's like classic. Everybody says we need to be fitter, but we're still all not fit. (Serge laughs) It's sort of, that's just the reality of the world that we live in, right? But we have to start making a stand. And the place we begin is customers. That's the place. And as soon as we start doing that, then everything else just becomes quite easy, actually. >> I like that. Focus on customers and it becomes easy. Serve, I'm kidding. What are your thoughts on this? >> Yeah, I think Dave summarized it well. It's very easy to just buy a tool or buy something, right? Fundamentally changing kind of an operating model is very difficult, but you need to fundamentally rethink for instance, all the responding initiatives. So, something as mundane as, You know, as a leader in my organization I have a budget, right? What's my incentive of collaborating with my peers in terms of delivering credible analysis form. And so, that to me kind of a fundamental shift that we need to operate, and that's probably one of the reasons why many of our largest organizations that we're serving are starting to introduce some new roles like a Chief Digital Officer, as kind of a way to kind of bring kind of a slightly different organization design. The challenge, though, is that, well, all of these teams are still kind of integrated with this fabric of these large systems which exist. So when we look at these value streams, in fact they're not independent from one another. You have a bunch of interdependencies. You are looking at kind of networks of these value streams. But the fundamental shift that we need to see is what we want these organizations to think about, ultimately with the part of the products or services that need to be focused on, all of these become kind of the primary things that we measure from point of view, and how do we align teams and projects and funding along these kinds of outcomes? >> So being customer focused, also being more broadly focused you mentioned the Chief Digital Officer role, which has an interesting role. It's supposed to look more, holistically, internally and externally. And we know that these organizations know we need to be better at this. like Dave's joke about we know we need to be more fit. But what's it going to take to actually create that collaboration, so that IT and business leaders are really working in lockstep and doing so in a timely fashion, so, that they're able to stay competitive. I do want to know from each of you, are you seeing examples of this already in progress? Pierre, let's start with you. >> I can only give you another example and say, one of the interesting things that we did was we try to embrace the delivery of services at HR in kind of a different frame this year, and kind of productize the services that we deliver. Now, if you're most people, you're trying to think about, "How do I set up things like communities "of practice and collaboration between people so "that they can work together on developing new services "new features, new products, et cetera." And we set out with creating this agile way of working. What we didn't anticipate, which was a very nice side effect, is that, because of COVID, because of the catalyst that it provided us, the remote working, people sense of ownership is inherently there. Meaning that self-organization of teams started happening. Nobody needed to crack a whip to get a bunch of guys to talk together with one another to figure out how to get stuff done. It's not like you could walk over to the water cooler and have a chat to Bob. Bob is a thousand miles away, or Bobby's sitting in another State. So, all of a sudden, all dynamic changed. And I have to say, people are a lot more resilient than what they're being given credit for. And if, as organizations, we embrace the culture in such a way and harness it in a positive way, we can actually get this movement to happen. And we actually can make the sum of the parts to be more than the whole. And this year we've seen that happen. And by no means, are we done 'cause we still have a lot of work to do, like Serge said, we have budgets, and budgets give you finite amount of movement left or right. Then you have to do what's best and possible within the frame that you're given. But I think embracing the cultural change and helping people to really excel at that and empowering them makes a huge difference in the way that you can get stuff done. >> Absolutely. Dave, what are your thoughts on this? >> I'm going to say something a little bit controversial, I think. I'm not a big fan of Chief Digital Officers. It just seems like we've got a problem. And some would argue that, "Well, if you've got a problem with somebody "you should get a coach" and all this stuff "and you get it sorted." And that's probably a good thing. But most digital officers, they're going to build a long-term career and create yet another stove pipe and that stove pipe's responsible for bringing all the other stove pipes together. It sounds a bit odd. If a digital officer is really there as a short term enabler, 'cause you asked IT and business leaders, trying to get them to work together better. The best business leaders (bell dings) know about IT, right? The best business leaders are IT sanctuary. Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos are great business leaders, but they know about technology, right? That's what brings them together. Technology is an asset and they may not be the most biggest expert in it, but they care deeply about learning about that stuff. So, I think the next few years we're going to see a lot of C-level and leaders in organizations become a lot more tech savvy, and maybe hire coaches to help them navigate. And the Chief Digital Officer will become more of a coach rather than a person that rolls out Slack or something, you know? (Pierre laughs) So, I think that is going to be the next big jump, really, when we realize that you don't get an additional thing. It's just part of what you do. >> Serge, agree, disagree? >> I agree. The reality is that it is happening, right? Don't get me wrong. We see that every day that so many States are highly integrated, organizations and teams are measuring business value, business outcomes. The problem is that it's oftentimes a very small subset of what these organizations are doing. And so, it's almost like the CEO is coming as kind of these new kind of, as Dave described. And it's got this new style organization which is really there to kind of scale what has been working with these organizations, but we're kind of creating this kind of almost shadow organization, as opposed to fundamentally rethinking and redesigning the organization and redesigning kind of the operating model. And so, we're kind of layering new stuff as opposed to fundamentally transforming. So, as long as it is just kind of just a step towards kind of a true transformation, I think that's fine. The challenge is to, again, create kind of a new set of silos, which are now called value streams, as opposed to young functional silos that we have today. >> So a lot of opportunities identified in this survey but there are still a lot of challenges there. So, I'd love to get you guys and our final question here in this panel to help us understand, from the BizOps coalition's perspective, how are you helping organizations to navigate these challenges, so, they can become successful, transform and actually become agile to respond to rapidly changing market conditions? Pierre, kick us off. >> Sure, from a coalition perspective, we're just trying to make sure that there's a set of sensible principles. That people can look at, can adopt that I think Dave mentioned it in another discussion, that give you that clarity of thought and mind in terms of what should you be thinking? How should you be thinking about it? What are the various aspects you need to consider? And then from that perspective, how do you implement these things in a sensible way for your organization? By no means is this this like, "Here are the 10 steps, you do them, and you're done." You'll be rich beyond your wildest dreams. It's not how it work. You're still going to have to work at it. You're still going to have to figure some stuff out. You're going to have to deep in yourself in your organizational policies, procedures, understand how the organization is actually working. You can't strap a V8 to Mini Cooper and expect to break the land speed record, without the wheels falling off, or something going wrong. So, you really need to harness that in a more sensible manner to move forward. And I think the coalition is on the right path to help organizations realize, "what is the sensible way to go?" "What are principles we can adopt "that we can abide by that will help us drive business "in a different way and close this chasm of disparity "between business and IT?" >> And Dave, your perspective on the BizOps coalition, helping organizations to sort through these challenges. >> Yeah. I'm going to share a little bit of a personal story. So, I must admit that I wasn't keen on the whole idea, and Serge sent me some stuff and he's like, "Could you just provide some feedback." And I did, and then there was a press release with my name on it. I saw, I was like, "Oh my God! "I better get involved because I don't want to "have my name associated "with something that doesn't make sense" But I've actually been surprisingly, I've actually found it a lot more positive than I thought because of exactly what Pierre's saying. So, basically, the coalition is a group of vendors, a bucolic of consultants, some pseudo thought leaders that think they are very thoughtful and maybe they're not, people like me. (Pierre laughs) And what we're doing though, is actually trying to get some clarity of terminology, get some clarity of, what are the principles? What are those key principles? How do they relate to each other? Get some, some synergy to allow, 'cause there's so much noise out there. And hopefully, this is going to say, "Okay, this is what BizOps is. "This is why it's important. "These are some simple things." And then hopefully, because of the breadth that Serge and others have managed to get in terms of membership, we're going to get all of those organizations to be consistently talking about these things, which will then create pressure on the market to actually start adopting these things in the way that we're proposing, or challenge those ideas and then make them better. So, I'm kind of excited about it, surprisingly, 'cause the last thing we need is yet another manifesto and group of people that spend their whole time talking about things and never getting anything done. But actually I think there might be some valuable stuff that comes out here and we're going to inspect and adapt to make sure it is valuable. And if it isn't, we will stop. (chuckles) (Lisa laughs) >> And Serge, strap us up with your thoughts and extending that value. >> Look, we started the BizOps manifesto really with kind of a very simple observation. Everybody's talking about the same stuff, right? But you have a value stream management church, the digital product management's church, the DevOps church, with Scrum church, the safe church. Right? But we're all saying the same thing. But we create so much confusion with our large enterprise customers, but it's just not a grain on a set of principles. And just saying like, look, fundamentally, we're all talking about the same thing. And there are process aspects, there are cultural aspects. There is what you measure. But fundamentally we agree on the same core set of principles. And so for me, the BizOps manifesto, first and foremost is to get the stakeholders from these different communities together, and recognize that, at the end of the day, we share the same values and create some clarity to the market as to how these pieces fit to one another. The second aspect, which is more from our point of view, as one of the vendors of tools, right? There's tons of tools out there. We talk a lot about kind of measuring business outcomes as a primary way to actually align to everybody in our organization. Well, today if you look at any of these organizations, on average, they use about 40 different tools on one of these value streams. None of that stuff integrates with one another. It's extremely difficult for an organization to be able to trace from an investment, all the way to stuff that delivers value and production to a customer. And so, one of my hopes for the coalition is that we start to actually provide some platform, data models, ontologies, to start to integrate those different tools to facilitate that kind of integration. So, those are kind of the two things which I think we can really help kind of develop and and improve on. >> Well, we know that there's a tremendous amount of folks out there that are wanting to embrace agility across the business, identifying areas where they need to do work. So, great advice from the three of you. Thank you so much for joining me on this power panel today and sharing what organizations can do to really embrace that agility across the organization. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Pierre Viljoen, Dave West and Serge Lucio. I'm Lisa Martin. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Welcome to this BizOps Manifesto Power Panel, Data Lake or Data Landfill. We're going to be talking about that today. I've got three guests joining me. We're going to dive through that. Kieran Taylor is here the CMO of Broadcom's Enterprise Software Division. Kieran, great to have you on the program. >> Thank you, Lisa. >> Kevin Surace is here as well. Chairman and CTO of Appvance, hey Kevin. >> Hey Lisa. >> And Isaac Sacolick Author and CEO of StarCIO. Isaac, welcome. >> Hi Lisa, thanks for having me. >> So we're going to spend the next 25 to 30 minutes talking about the challenges and the opportunities that data brings to organizations. You guys are going to share some of your best practices for how organizations can actually sort through all this data to make data-driven decisions. We're also going to be citing some statistics from the Inaugural BizOps Industry Survey of the State of Digital Business in which 519 business and technology folks were surveyed across five nations. Let's go ahead and jump right in and the first one in that server that I just mentioned 97% of organizations say we've got data related challenges, limiting the amount of information that we actually have available to the business. Big conundrum there. How do organizations get out of that conundrum? Kieran, we're going to start with you. >> Thanks Lisa. You know, I think, I don't know if it's so much limiting information as it is limiting answers. There's no real shortage of data I don't think being captured, recently met with a unnamed auto manufacturer Who's collecting petabytes of data from their connected cars and they're doing that because they don't really yet know what questions they have of the data. So I think you get out of this Data Landfill conundrum by first understanding what questions to ask. It's not algorithms, it's not analytics. It's not, you know, math that's going to solve this problem. It's really, really understanding your customer's issues and what questions to ask of the data >> Understanding what questions to ask of the data. Kevin, what are your thoughts? >> Yeah, look, I think it gets down to what questions you want to ask and what you want out of it, right? So there's questions you want to ask but what are the business outcomes you're looking for, which is the core of BizOps anyway, right? What are the business outcomes and what business outcomes can I act upon? So there are so many business outcomes you can get from data and you go, well, I can't legally act upon that. I can't practically act upon that. I can't, whether it's lay off people or hire people or whatever it is, right? So what are the actionable items? There is plenty of data. We would argue too much data. Now we could say, is the data good? Is the data bad? Is it poorly organized? Is it, noisy? There's all other problems, right? There's plenty of data. What do I do with it? What can I do that's actionable? If I was an automaker and I had lots of sensors on the road, I had petabytes, as Kieran says and I'd probably bringing in petabytes potentially every day. Well, I could make myself driving systems better. That's an obvious place to start or that's what I would do but I could also potentially use that to change people's insurance and say, if you drive in a certain way something we've never been able to do. If you drive in a certain way, based on the sensors you get a lower insurance rate, then nobody's done that. But now there's interesting business opportunities for that data that you didn't have one minute ago and I just gave away. So, (laughs) it's all about the actionable items in the data. How do you drive something to the top line and the bottom line? 'Cause in the end, that's how we're all measured. >> And Isaac, I know you say data is the lifeblood. What are your thoughts on this conundrum? >> Well, I think, you know, they gave you the start and the end of the equation, start with a question. What are you really trying to answer? What you don't understand that you want to learn about your business connect it to an outcome that is valuable to you. And really what most organizations struggle with is a process that goes through discovery, learning what's in the data, addressing data, quality issues, loading new data sources if required and really doing that iteratively and we're all agile people here at BizOps, right? So doing it iteratively, getting some answers out and understanding what the issues are with the underlying data and then going back and revisiting and reprioritizing what you want to do next. Do you want to go look at another question? Is the answer heading down a path that you can drive outcomes? Do you got to go cleanse some data? So it's really that, how do you put it together so that you can peel the onion back and start looking at data and getting insights out of it. >> Great advice, another challenge though, that the survey identified was that nearly 70% of the respondents and again, 519 business and technology professionals from five countries said, we are struggling to create business metrics from our data with so much data, so much that we can't access. Can you guys share best practices for how organizations would sort through and identify the best data sources from which they can identify the ideal business metrics? Kieran, take it away. >> Sure thing, I guess I'll build on Isaac's statements. Every company has some gap in data, right? And so when you do that, that data gap analysis I think you really, I don't know. It's like Alice in Wonderland, begin at the beginning, right? You start with that question like Isaac said, And I think the best questions are really born from an understanding of what your customers value. And if you dig into that, you understand what the customers value, you build it off of actual customer feedback, market research then you know what questions to ask and then from that, hey, what inputs do I need to really understand how to solve that particular business issue or problem. >> Kevin, what are your thoughts? >> Yeah, I'm going to add to that, completely agree but, look, let's start with sales data, right? So sales data is something, everybody watching this understands, even if they're not in sales, they go well, okay, I understand sales data. What's interesting there is we know who our customers are. We could probably figure out if we have enough data, why they buy, are they buying because of a certain sales person? Are they buying because it's a certain region? Are they buying because of some demographic that we don't understand, but AI can pull out, right? So I would like to know, who's buying and why they're buying. Because if I know that I might make more of what more of those people want whatever that is, certain fundamental sales changes or product changes or whatever it is. So if you could certainly start there, if you start nowhere else, say I sell X today. I'd like to sell X times 1.2 by next year. Okay, great. Can I learn from the last five years of sales, millions of units or million or whatever it is, how to do that better and the answer is for sure yes and yes there's problems with the data and there's holes in the data as Kieran said and there's missing data. It doesn't matter, there's a lot of data around sales. So you can just start there and probably drive some top line growth, just doing what you're already doing but doing it better and learning how to do it better. >> Learning how to do it better. Isaac, talk to us about what your thoughts are here with respect to this challenge. >> Well, when you look at that percentage 70% struggling with business metrics, you know what I see is some companies struggling when they have too few metrics and you know, their KPIs, it really doesn't translate well to people doing work for a customer for an application, responding to an issue. So when you have too few in there too disconnected from the work, people don't understand how to use them and then on the flip side I see other organizations trying to create metrics around every single part of the operation, you know, dozens of different ways of measuring user experience and so forth. And that doesn't work because now we don't know what to prioritize. So I think the art of this is management coming back and saying, what are the metrics? Do we want to see impact and changes over in a short amount of time, over the next quarter, over the next six months and to pick a couple in each category, certainly starting with the customer, certainly looking at sales but then also looking at operations and looking at quality and looking at risk and say to the organization, these are the two or three we're going to focus on in the next six months and then I think that's what simplifies it for organizations. >> Thanks, Isaac. So something that I found interesting, it's not surprising in that the survey found that too much data is one of the biggest challenges that organizations have followed by the limitations that we just talked about in terms of identifying what are the ideal business metrics, but a whopping 74% of survey respondents said we failed to have key data available in real time, which is a big inhibitor for data-driven decision-making. Can you guys offer some advice to organizations? How can they harness this data and glean insights from it faster, Kieran, take it away. >> Yeah, I think there are probably five steps to establishing business KPIs and Lisa your first two questions and these gentleman's answers laid out the first two that is define the questions that you want answers for and then identify what those data inputs would be. You know, if you've got a formula in mind, what data inputs do do you need? The remaining three steps. One is, you know, to evaluate the data you've got and then identify what's missing, you know what do you need to then fetch? And then that fetching, you need to think about the measurement method, the frequency I think Isaac mentioned, you know this concept of tools for all. We have too many tools to collect data. So, the measurement method and frequency is important standardizing on tools and automating that collection wherever possible. And then the last step, this is really the people component of the formula. You need to identify stakeholders that will own those business KPIs and even communicate them within the organization. That human element is sometimes forgotten and it's really important. >> It is important, it's one of the challenges as well. Kevin, talk to us about your thoughts here. >> Yeah, again I mean, for sure you've got in the end you've got the human element. You can give people all kinds of KPIs as Isaac said, often it's too many. You have now KPI the business to death and nobody can get out and do anything that doesn't work. Obviously you can't improve things until you measure them. So you have to measure, we get that. But this question of live data is interesting. My personal view is only certain kinds of data are interesting, absolutely live in the moment. So I think people get in their mind, oh, well if I could deploy IOT everywhere and get instantaneous access within one second to the amalgam of that data, I'm making up words too. That would be interesting. Are you sure that'd be interesting? I might rather analyze the last week of real, real data, really deep analysis, right? Build you know, a real model around that and say, okay for the next week, you ought to do the following. Now I get that if you're in the high-frequency stock trading business you know, every millisecond counts, okay? But most of our businesses do not run by the millisecond and we're not going to make a business decision especially humans involved in a millisecond anyway. We make business decisions based on a fair bit of data, days and weeks. So this is just my own personal opinion. I think people get hung up on this. I've got to have all this live data. No, you want great data analysis using AI and machine learning to evaluate as much data as you can get over whatever period of time that is a week, a month a year and start making some rational decisions off of that information. I think that is how you run a business that's going to crush your competition. >> Good advice, Isaac what are your thoughts on these comments? >> Yeah, I'm going to pair off of Kevin's comments. You know, how do you chip away at this problem at getting more real time data? And I'll share two insights first, from the top down, you know, when StarCIO works with a group of CEO and their executive group, you know how are they getting their data? Well, they're getting it in a boardroom with PowerPoints with spreadsheets behind those PowerPoints, with analysts doing a lot of number crunching and behind all that are all the systems of record around the CRM and the ERP and all the other systems that are telling them how they're performing. And I suggest to them for a month, leave the world of PowerPoint and Excel and bring your analysts in to show you the data live in the systems, ask questions and see what it's like to work with real time data. That first changes the perspective in terms of all the manual work that goes into homogenizing that data for them. But then they start getting used to looking at the tools where the data is actually living. So that's an exercise from the top down from the bottom up when we talk to the it groups, you know so much of our data technologies were built at a time when batch processing in our data centers was the only way to go. We ran these things overnight to move data from point a to point B and with the Cloud, with data streaming technologies it's really a new game in town. And so it's really time for many organizations to modernize and thinking about how they're streaming data. Doesn't necessarily have to be real time. It's not really IOT but it's really saying, I need to have my data updated on a regular basis with an SLA against it so that my teams and my businesses can make good decisions around things. >> So let's talk now about digital transformation. We've been talking about that for years. We talked a lot about in 2020, the acceleration of digital transformation for obvious reasons. But when organizations are facing this data conundrum that we talked about, this sort of data disconnect too much can't get what we need right away. Do we need it right away? How did they flip the script on that so that it doesn't become an impediment to digital transformation but it becomes an accelerant. Kieran >> You know, a lot of times you'll hear vendors talk about technology as being the answer, right? So MI, ML, my math is better than your math, et cetera. And technology is important but it's only effective to the point that which people can actually interpret understand and use the data. And so I would put forth this notion of having data at all levels throughout an organization too often. What you'll see is that I think Isaac mentioned it, you know the data is delivered to the C-suite via PowerPoint and it's been sanitized and scrubbed, et cetera. But heck, by the time it gets to the C-suite it's three weeks old. Data at all levels is making sure that throughout organization, the right people have real-time access to data and can make actionable decisions based upon that. So I think that's a real vital ingredient to successful digital transformation. >> Kevin. >> Well, I like to think of digital transformation as looking at all of your relatively manual or paper-based or other processes whatever they are throughout the organization and saying is this something that can now be done for lack of a better word by a machine, right? And that machine could be algorithms. It could be computers, it could be humans it could be Cloud, it could be AI it could be IOT doesn't really matter. (clears throat) And so there's a reason to do that and of course, the basis of that is the data. You've got to collect data to say, this is how we've been performing. This is what we've been doing. So an example, a simple example of digitalization is people doing RPA around customer support. Now you collect a lot of data on how customer support has been supporting customers. You break that into tiers and you say, here's the easiest, lowest tier. I had farmed that out to probably some other country 20 years ago or 10 years ago. Can I even with the systems in place, can I automate that with a set of processes, Robotic Process Automation that digitizes that process now, Now there still might be, you know 20 different screens that click on all different kinds of things, whatever it is, but can I do that? Can I do it with some Chatbots? Can I do it with it? No, I'm not going to do all the customer support that way but I could probably do a fair bit. Can I digitize that process? Can I digitize the process? Great example we all know is insurance companies taking claims. Okay, I have a phone. Can, I take a picture of my car that just got smashed send it in, let AI analyze it and frankly, do an ACH transfer within the hour, because if it costs them insurance company on average 300 to $500 depending on who they are to process a claim, it's cheaper to just send me the $500 then even question it. And if I did it two or three times, well then I'm trying to steal their money and I should go to jail, right? So these are just, I'm giving these as examples 'cause they're examples that everyone who is watching this would go, oh I understand you're digitizing a process. So now when we get to much more complex processes that we're digitizing in data or hiring or whatever, those are a little harder to understand but I just tried to give those as like everyone understands yes, you should digitize those. Those are obvious, right? >> Now those are great examples, you're right. They're relatable across the board here. Isaac, talk to me about what your thoughts are about. Okay, let's do the conundrum. How do we flip the script and leverage data, access to it insights to drive and facilitate digital transformation rather than impede it. >> Well remember, you know, digital transformation is really about changing the business model, changing how you're working with customers and what markets you're going after. You're being forced to do that because of the pace digital technologies are enabling competitors to outpace you. And so we really like starting digital transformations with a vision. What does this business need to do better, differently more of what markets are we going to go after? What types of technologies are important? And we're going to create that vision but we know long-term planning, doesn't work. We know multi-year planning, doesn't work. So we're going to send our teams out on an agile journey over the next sprint, over the next quarter and we're going to use data to give us information about whether we're heading in the right direction. Should we do more of something? Is this feature higher priority? Is there a certain customer segment that we need to pay attention to more? Is there a set of defects happening in our technology that we have to address? Is there a new competitor stealing market share all that kind of data is what the organization needs to be looking at on a very regular basis to say, do we need to pivot, what we're doing? Do we need to accelerate something? Are we heading in the right direction? Should we give ourselves high fives and celebrate a quick win? Because we've accomplished something 'cause so much of transformation is what we're doing today. We're going to change what we're doing over the next three years, and then guess what? There's going to be a new set of technologies. There's going to be another disruption that we can't anticipate and we want our teams sitting on their toes waiting to look at data and saying, what should we do next? >> That's a great segue Isaac into our last question, which is around culture that's always one of those elephants in the room, right? Because so much cultural transformation is necessary but it's incredibly difficult. So question for you guys, Kieran we'll start with you is, should you advise leadership, should really create a culture, a company-wide culture around data? What do you think? >> Absolutely. I mean, this reminds me of DevOps in many ways and you know, the data has to be shared at all levels and has to empower people to make decisions at their respective levels so that we're not, you know kind of siloed in our knowledge or our decision-making, it's through that collective intelligence that I think organizations can move forward more quickly but they do have to change the culture and they've got to have everyone in the room. Everyone's got a stake in driving business success from the C-suite down to the individual contributor >> Right, Kevin, your thoughts >> You know what? Kieran's right. Data silos, one of the biggest brick walls in all of our way, all the time, you know SecOps says there is no way I'm going to share that database because it's got PII. Okay, well, how about if we strip the PII? Well, then that won't be good for something else and you're getting these huge arguments and if you're not driving it from the top, certainly the CIO, maybe the CFO, maybe the CEO I would argue the CEO, drives it from the top. 'Cause the CEO drives company culture and you know, we talk BizOps and the first word of that is Biz. It's the business, right? It's Ops being driven by business goals and the CEO has to set the business goals. It's not really up to the CIO to set business goals. They're setting operational goals, it's up to the CEO. So when the CEO comes out and says our business goals are to drive up sales by this drive down cost by this drive up speed of product development, whatever it is and we're going to digitize all of our processes to do that. We're going to set in KPIs. We're going to measure everything that we do and everybody's going to work around this table. By the way just like we did with DevOps a decade ago, right? And said, Dev, you actually have to work with Ops now and they go, those dangerous guys way over in that other building, we don't even know who they are but in time people realize that we're all on the same team and that if developers develop something that operations can't host and support and keep alive, it's junk right? And we used to do that and now we're much better at it. And whether it's Dev, SecOps or Dev two-way Ops, whatever all those teams working together. Now we're going to spread that out and make it a bigger pyre on the company and it starts with the CEO. And when the CEO makes it a directive for the company I think we're all going to be successful. >> Isaac, what are your thoughts? >> I think we're really talking about a culture of transformation and a culture of collaboration. I mean, again, everything that we're doing now we're going to build, we're going to learn. We're going to use data to pivot what we're doing. We're going to release a product to customers. We're going to get feedback. We're going to continue to iterate over those things. Same thing when it comes to sales, same things that you know, the experiments that we do for marketing, what we're doing today, we're constantly learning. We're constantly challenging our assumptions. We're trying to throw out the sacred cows with status quo, 'cause we know there's going to be another Island that we have to go after and that's the transformation part. The collaboration part is really you know, what you're hearing. Multiple teams, not just Dev and Ops and not just data and Dev, but really the spectrum of business of product, of stakeholders, of marketing and sales, working with technologists and saying, look this is the things that we need to go after over these time periods and work collaboratively and iteratively around them. And again, the data is the foundation for this, right? And we talk about a learning culture as part of that, the data is a big part of that learning, learning new skills and what new skills to learn is as part of that. But when I think about culture, you know the things that slow down organizations is when they're not transforming fast enough, or they're going in five or six different directions, they're not collaborative enough and the data is the element in there that is an equalizer. It's what you show everybody to say, look what we're doing today is not going to make us survive over the next three years. >> The data equalizer, that sounds like it could be movie coming out in 2021. (laughing) Gentlemen, thank you for walking us through some of those interesting metrics coming out of the BizOps Inaugural Survey. Yes, there are challenges with data. Many of them aren't surprising but there's also a lot of tremendous opportunity and I liked how you kind of brought it around to from a cultural perspective. It's got to start from that C-suite to Kieran's point all the way down. I know we could keep talking, we're out of time, but we'll have to keep following, this as a very interesting topic. One that is certainly pervasive across industries. Thanks guys for sharing your insights. >> Than you. >> Thank you, Lisa. >> Thank you, Lisa. >> For Kieran Taylor, Kevin Surace and Isaac Sacolick. I'm Lisa Martin. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music)

>> Presenter: From around the globe, it's theCUBE, with coverage of KubeCon and CloudNativeCon North America 2020 Virtual. Brought to you by Red Hat, the Cloud Native Computing Foundation and ecosystem partners. >> Hey, welcome back everybody, Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're coming to you from our Palo Alto Studios with our ongoing coverage of KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020, the digital version. It would have been the North American version but obviously everything is digital. So we're excited, we've been coming back here for years and we've got a founder of CNCF and also a practitioner, really great opportunity to get some insight from someone who's out in the field and putting this stuff into work. So we're joined in this next segment by Ken Owens. He is the Vice President of Software Development Engineering for MasterCard, and he's a founding member of the CNCF, The Cloud Native Computing Foundation. Ken, great to see you. >> Yeah, great. Thank you for having me, I have, I've enjoyed theCUBE over the years and I'm glad to be a part of it again. >> Yeah, so we're, we're psyched to have you on, and I think it's the first time I've got to talk to you. I think you might've been on in LA a couple of years ago, or I was kind of drifting around that show. I don't think I was a it was on the set that day, but before we jump into kind of what's going on now, you were a founding member of CNCF. So let's take a step back and kind of share your perspective as to kind of where we are now from where this all began and kind of this whole movement around Cloud Native. Certainly it's a good place to be. >> Yeah, yeah definitely. It's been a great ride. In our industry, we go through these sort of timeframes every decade or so, where something big kind of comes along and you get involved in and you participate in it. And it gets to be a lot of fun and it either dies or it evolves into something else, right? And with CloudNativeCon Cloud Native itself, this concept of just how difficult it was to really move with the type of agility and the type of speed that developers in the enterprise really need to move at. It was just, it was hard to get there with just traditional infrastructure, traditional ways of doing configurations of doing management of infrastructure and it really needed something different and something to kind of help, it was called orchestration of course but at the time we didn't know it was called orchestration right. We knew we needed things like service mesh, but they weren't called service meshes then. There were more like control planes. And how do you, how do you custom create all of these different pieces? And the great thing about the CNCF is that we, when we started it, we had very simple foundational principles we wanted to follow right. One was, we wanted to have end users involved. A lot of foundations as become very vendor-driven and very vendor-centric. And you kind of lose your, your core base of the practitioners as you call us right? The guys who actually need to solve problems they're trying to make a living solving problems for the industry, not just for selling products, right? And so it was important that we get those end users involved and that, and that's probably the biggest changes. It's a great technology body. We had great technologists, great engineers and the foundation but we also have a huge over 150 end users that have engaged and been very involved and contributing to the end users things of the community, contributing to the foundation now. And it's been awesome to see that come to fruition over the last three years. >> Yeah, it certainly part of the magic of open source, that's been so, so transformative. And we've seen that obviously with servers and Linux and what what that did, but we've been talking a lot lately too about kind of the anniversary of the of the Agile Manifesto and kind of the Agile Movement and really changing the prioritization around change and really making change a first class citizen as opposed to kind of a nightmare I don't want to deal with and really building systems and ways of doing things that adopt that. I want to just to pull up the Cloud Native definition 'cause I think it's interesting. We talk about Cloud Native a lot and you guys actually wrote some words down and I think it's worth reading them that Cloud Native Technologies empower organizations to build and run scalable applications in dynamic environments. Dynamic environments is such a key piece to this puzzle because it used to be, this is your infrastructure person, you've got to build something that fits into this. Now with an app-centric world has completely flipped over and the application developer doesn't have to worry about the environment anymore, right? It's spin it up and make it available to me when I need it. A really different way of thinking about things than kind of this static world. >> Definitely and then that was the big missing piece for all those years was how do you get to this dynamic environment, right, that embraces change and embraces risk to some extent. Not risk like you heard in the past with risk avoidance is so important to have, right. It's really more, how do you embrace risk and fail earlier in the process, learn earlier in the process so that when you get to production you're not failing, you're not having to worry about failure because you cut as much as you could in the earlier phases of your development life cycle. And that's been set, like you said that dynamic piece has just been such the difference. I think in why it's been taken off. >> Yeah. >> And industry this last five years now that we've been around. >> Yeah, for sure. So then the next one well, I'm just going to go through them 'cause there's three main tenants of this thing. These techniques and techniques enabled loosely coupled systems that allow engineers to make high impact changes frequently and predictably with minimum toil. I mean, those are, those are really hard challenges in a classic waterfall way with PRDs and MRDs and everything locked down in a big, giant Gantt chart that fills half of the half the office to actually be able to have loosely coupled systems. Again a really interesting concept versus hardwired, connected systems. Now you're talking about APIs and systems all connecting. Really different way to think about development and how do you build applications. >> Yeah and the interesting thing there is the very first definition we came up with five plus years ago was containers, containerized workloads, right? And being technologist, everyone focused on those words containers and containerized and then everything had to be a container, right? And to your point, that isn't what we're trying to do, right? We're trying to create services that are just big enough to support whatever is needed for that service to support and be able to scale those up and down independently of other dependent systems that may have different requirements associated with what they have to do, right. And it was more about that keeping those highly efficient type of patterns in mind of spinning up and spinning down things that don't have impact or cause impact to other larger components around them was really the key not containers or containerized. >> Right. >> Obviously that's one of the patterns you could follow to create those types of services and those patterns, but there is nothing that guarantees it has to be a container that can do that. Lots of BMS today and lots of Bare Metal Servers can have a similar function. They're just not going to be as dynamic as you may want them to be in other environments. >> Right and then the third tenant, three of three is fostering sustainable ecosystem of open source vendor neutral projects, democratizing state-of-the-art patterns to make these innovations accessible for everyone. So just the whole idea of democratization of technology, democratization of data, democratization of tools, to do something with the data to find the insight democratization of the authority to execute on those decisions once you get going on that, I mean the open source and kind of this democratization to enable a broad distribution of power to more than just mahogany row, huge fundamental shift in the way people think about things. And really even still today, as everyone's trying to move their organizations to be more data-centric in the way they operate, it is really all about the democratization and getting that information and the tools and the ability to do something with it to as broad a group of people as you can. And that's even before we talk about open source development and the power of again, as you said, bringing in this really active community who want to contribute. It's a really interesting way that open source works. It's such a fun thing to watch, and I'm not a developer from the outside, but to see people get excited about helping other people. I think that's probably the secret to the whole thing that really taps into. >> Yeah, it is. And open source, there were discussions about open source for 20 plus years trying to get more into open source contributing to open source in an enterprise mindset, right? And it could never really take off 'cause it's not really the foundation or the platforms or the capabilities needed to do that. And now to your point, open source was really the underlying engine that is making all of this possible. Without open source and some of those early days of trying to get more open source and understanding of open source in the enterprise, I think we'd still be trying to get adoption but open source had just gotten to that point where everyone wanted to do more with open source. The CNCF comes along and said, here's the set of democratized, we're not going to have kingmakers in this organization. We're going to have a lot of open solutions, a lot of good options for companies to look at, and we're not going to lock you in to anything. 'Cause that's another piece of that open source model, right. Open source still can lock you in, right. But if you have open choices within open source, there's less, lock-in potential and locking isn't really a horrible thing. It's just one of those tenants you don't want to be tied too tightly to any one solution or one hope, open source even program because that could 'cause issues of that minimal toil we talked about, right. If you have a lot of dependencies and a lot of, I always joked about OpenStack but if I have to email two guys, if I find an issue in OpenStack about security that's not really a great security model that I can tell my customers I have your security covered, right? So, you want to get away from emails and having to ask for help, if you see a big security issue you want to just address it right then and fix it fast. >> Right, right. So much to unpack there. And for those that don't follow you, you've done a ton of presentations. You've got a ton of great content out of the internet with deep technical dives, into some of this stuff and the operational challenges in your philosophies but good keeping it kind of high level here. 'Cause one of the themes that comes up over and over in some of the other stuff I saw from you is really about asking the right questions. And we hear this time and time again, that the way to get the right answer first you got to frame the question right. And you talk quite extensively about asking the why and asking the how. I wonder if you can unpack that a little bit as to why those two questions are so important and how do you ask them in a way that doesn't piss everybody off or scare them away when you're at a big company like MasterCard that has a lot of personal information, you're in the finance industry, you got ton of regulation but still you're asking how and you're asking why. >> Yeah, definitely. And those, those are two questions that I keep coming back to in the industry because they are, they're not asked enough in my opinion. I think they, for the reasons you brought up those there's too much pushback or there's, you don't want to be viewed as someone who's being difficult, right? And there maybe other reasons why you don't want to ask that but I like to ask the why first because it, you kind of have to understand what's the problem you're trying to solve. And it kind of goes back to my engineering background, I think right. I love to solve problems and one of my early days and you might have heard this on one of my, my interviews, right. But in my early days, I was trying to fix a problem that I was on an advanced engineering team. And I was tier four support in a large Telco. And for months we had this issue with one of our large oil based companies and no one could solve it. And I was on call the night that they called in. And I asked the guy a simple question, tell me which lights you see on this DHUC issue? Which is a piece of equipment that sits between a ATM network and a regular Sonnet network. So we're watching, I'm asking them as kind of find out where in this path, there's a problem. And the guy tells me where there's no lights on. And I'm like well, plug in the power and let me know when it boots up and then let's try another test. And that was the problem. So my, the cleaning crew would come through and unplugged it. And so I learned early on in my crew that if you don't ask those simple questions, you just assume that everything's working almost nine times out of 10, it's the simple, easy solution to a problem. You're just too busy thinking of all the complex things that could go wrong and trying to solve all the hard problems first. And so I really try to help people think about, ask the why questions, ask, why is this important? Why do we need to do this now? Why, what would happen if we don't do this? If we did it this other way, what's the downside of doing it this other way? Really think through your options, 'cause it may take you 20, 30 minutes to kind of do a good analysis of a problem, but then your solution you're not going to spend weeks trying to troubleshoot when it doesn't work because you put the time upfront to think about it. So that's sort of the main reason why I like to ask the why and the how, because it forces you to think outside of your normal, my job is to take this cog and put it over here and fix this, right. And you don't want to be in that, that mode when you're solving complex problems because you overlook or you miss the simple things. >> Right. So you don't like the 'cause we've always done it that way? (both laughing) >> I do not. And I hear that a lot everywhere I've been in the industry and anywhere, any company you have those, this is the way we've always done it. >> Yeah, yeah. Just like the way we've always traveled, right. And the way we've always been educated and the way we've always consumed entertainment. It's like really? I wanted to (indistinct) >> I have learned though that there's a good, I like to understand the reason behind why we've always done it that way. So I do always ask that question. >> Right. >> I don't turn around on someone and get mad at them and you say, Oh, we can't we have to do it differently. I don't have the mindset of let's throw that out the window because I realized that over time something happened. It's like when I had younger kids, I always laugh because they put these warnings on those whatever they call them at the kids stand up in them. >> Right, the little, the little (indistinct) >> Don't put them on top of the stairs right. These stupid little statements are written on there. And I always thought I was dumb. And if somebody told me, well that's because somebody put their kid near the pool and they drown. >> Right, right. >> You have to kind of point out the obvious to people and so, >> Yeah. >> I don't think it's that dangerous of a situation and in the work environment, but hopefully we're not making the same mistakes that have been prevented by not allowing just the, not because we've done it this way before modeled it to go forward. >> Right, right now we have a rule around here too. There's a reason we have every rules is because somebody blew it at some point in time. That's why we have the rule that I want to shift gears a little bit and talk about automation, right? 'Cause automation is such a big and important piece of this whole story especially as these systems scale, scale, scale. And we know that people are prone to errors. I mean, I had seen that story about the cleaner accidentally unplugging things. We all know that people fat fingers, copy and paste is not used as universally as it should be. But I wonder if you could share, how important automation is. And I know you've talked a lot about how people should think about automate automation and prioritizing automation and helping use automation to both make people more productive but also to prioritize what the people should be working on as well as lowering the error rate on stuff that they probably shouldn't be doing anyway. >> Exactly, yeah automation to me is, as you've heard me say before is it's something that is probably almost as big of a key tenet as open source should be, right? It's one of those foundational things that it really helps you to get rid of some of that churn and some of the toil that you run into in a production environment where you're trying to always figure out what went wrong and why did this system not work on this point in time and this day and this deployment, and it's almost to your point always a fat finger, someone deleted an IP address from the IPAM system. There's all kinds of errors that you can people can tell you about that have happened. But to the root of your question is automation needs to be thought about from three different primary areas in my view, in my experience. The first one is the infrastructure as code, software defined infrastructure, right. So the networking teams and the storage teams and the security teams are probably the furthest behind in adopting automation in in their jobs, right. And their jobs are probably the most critical pieces of the infrastructure, right? And so those are, those are pieces that I really highly encouraged them to think about how can they automate those areas. The second piece is I think is equally as important as the infrastructure piece is the application side. When I first joined multiple enterprises in the past, the test coverage is in the low 10's to 20%, right. And your test coverage is a direct correlation to how well your application is going to behave and production in terms of failures, right? So if you have low test coverage, you're going to have high failure rates. It's sort of over over all types of industries every study has shown that, right. So getting your test coverage up and testing the right things not just testing to have test coverage right. >> But actually. >> Right, right. >> Thinking through your user stories and acceptance criteria and having good test is really, really important. So you have those two bookends, right. And in between, I think it's important that you look at how you connect to these services, these distributed systems we talked about in the opening right. If you fully automate your infrastructure and fully automate your application development and delivery, that's great. But if in the middle you have this gooey middle that doesn't really connect well doesn't really have the automation in place to ensure that your certificates are there that your security is in place. That middle piece can become really a problem from a security and from a availability issue. And so those those are the two pieces that I say really focus on is that gooey middle and then that infrastructure piece is really the two keys. >> Right, right. You've got another group of words that you use a lot. I want you to give us a little bit more color behind it. And that's talking to people to tell them that they need to spend more time on investigation. They need to do more experimentation. And then and the one that really popped out to me was it was retro to retrospective to not necessarily a postmortem which I thought is interesting. You say retrospective versus the postmortem, because this is an ongoing process for continuous improvement. And then finally, what seems drop dead dumb obvious is to iterate and deliver. But I wonder if you can share a little bit more color on how important it is to experiment and to investigate and to have those retrospectives. >> Yeah definitely. And then it kind of goes back to that culture we want to create in a Cloud Native world, right. We want to be open to thinking about how we can solve problems better, how we can have each iteration we want, to look at, how do we have a less toil, have less issues. How do we improve the, I liked kind of delight in your experience, how do you make your developers and your customers specific, but specifically how do you make your customers so happy with your service? And when you think about those sort of areas, right. You want to spend some portion of your time dedicated to how do I look at and investigate better ways of doing things or more improvements around the way my customer experience is being delivered. Asking your customers questions, right. You'd be surprised how how many customers don't ever get asked for their opinion on how something works, right. And they want to be asked, they'd love to give you feedback. It doesn't necessarily mean you're going to go do it that next iteration, right? The old adage I like to use is if Henry Ford had listened to his customers he would have tried to breed a faster horse, right? And so you have to kind of think about what you want to try to deliver as a product and as an organization but at the same time, that input is important. And I think, I say carve it out, because if you don't, we're so busy today and there's so much going on in our lives. If you don't dedicate and carve out some of that time and protect that time, you will never get to that, right. It's always a, I'll get to that next year. Maybe our next iteration I'll try, right. And so it's important to really hold that time as sacred and spend time every week, every couple of weeks, whatever it works out in the schedule, but actually put that in your calendar and block out that time and use it to really look at what's possible, what's relevant, what kind of improvements you can have. I think those are really the key the key takeaways I can have from that piece of it. And then, the last one you asked about, which I think is so important, is the retrospective, right. Always trying to get better and better at what you do is, is an engineer's goal, right? We never liked to fail. We never liked to do something twice, right? We don't want to, we want to learn the first time we make a mistake and not make it over and over again. So that those retrospectives and improving on what you're doing iteratively. And to the point you brought up and I like to bring this up a lot, 'cause I've been part not at MasterCard, but at other companies parts of companies that would talk a great game come up with great stories, say here's our plan. And then when we get ready to go to deliver it, we go and we reinvestigate the plan and see if there's a better plan. And then we get to a point where we're ready to go execute. And then we go back and start all over again, right. And you've got to deliver iteratively, if you don't, you're the point I like to always make is you're never going to be ready, right. It's like, when are you ready to have kids? You never ready to have kids, right. You just have to go and you'll learn as you go. You know so. >> Right, right, I love that. Well again, Ken, you have so much great stuff out there for technical people that want to dive in deep? So I encourage them just to do a simple YouTube or excuse me, YouTube search or Google search but I want to give you the last word. One word, I'm going to check the transcript when this thing is over that you've used probably more than any other word while we've been talking for the last few minutes is toil. And I think it's really interesting that it brings up and really highlights your empathy towards what you're trying to help developers avoid and what you're trying to help teams avoid so that they can be more productive. You keep saying, avoid the toil, get out of the toil, get out of this kind of crap that inhibits people from getting their job done and being creative and being inventive and being innovative. Where does that come from? And I just love that you keep reinforce it and just kind of your final perspective as we wrap on 2020 and another year of CNCF and clearly containers and Kubernetes and Cloud Native is continues to be on fire and on a tear. I just wonder if you can share a little bit of your perspective as a founding member as we kind of come to the end of 2020. >> Yeah definitely. Thanks again for having me. It's been a great, great discussion. I am a developer by background, by trade today, I still develop. I still contribute to open source and I've had this mantra pretty much my entire career that you have to get into the weeds and understand what everyone's experiencing in order to figure out how to solve the problems, right. You can't be in an ivory tower and look down and say, Oh, there's a problem, I'm going to go fix that. It just doesn't work that way. And most problems you try to solve in that model will be problems that no other team has really experienced. And there not going to be help, they're not going to be thankful that you solved the problem they don't have, right? They want you to solve a problem that they have. And so I think that that's sort of a key for the reason why I spent so much time talking about that as I live it every day. I understand it. I talk with my development community and with a broader community of developers at MasterCard and understand the pains that they're going through and try to help them every day with coming up with ways to help make their lives a lot easier. So it's important to me and to to all organizations out there and in all of the, in the world. So, CNCF its been great. It's still growing. I'm always looking for end users. I'd love to talk to you. Well, you can reach out to, to the CNCF if you'd like to learn more, our website has information on how to get connected to the end user community. We community within the CNCF that is not, it's a private community. So you don't have to worry about your information being shared. If you don't want people to know you belong to the community, you don't have to list that information. If you want to list it, you're welcome to list it. There's no expectations on you to contribute to open source, but we do encourage you to contribute, and are here to support that end user community any way we can. So thanks again for having us and looking forward to, to a great show in North America. >> All right well, thank you, Ken, for sharing your information sharing the insight, sharing the knowledge really appreciate it and great to catch up. All right. He's Ken, I'm Jeff. You're watching theCUBE with our ongoing coverage of KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 North America Digital. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time. (gentle music)

>> Narrator: From around the globe, it's theCUBE! With digital coverage of DevOps Virtual Forum, brought to you by Broadcom. >> Hi, Lisa Martin here covering the Broadcom DevOps Virtual Forum. I'm very pleased to be joined today by a CUBE alumni, Jeffrey Hammond, the Vice President and Principal Analyst serving CIOs at Forrester. Jeffrey, nice to talk with you today. >> Good morning, it's good to be here. >> So, a virtual forum, a great opportunity to engage with our audiences. So much has changed in the last, it's an understatement, right? Or it's an overstated thing, but it's obvious. So much has changed. When we think of DevOps, one of the things that we think of is speed, enabling organizations to be able to better serve customers or adapt to changing markets like we're in now. Speaking of the need to adapt, talk to us about what you're seeing with respect to DevOps and Agile in the age of COVID. What are things looking like? >> Yeah, I think that for most organizations, we're in a period of adjustment. When we initially started, it was essentially a sprint. You run as hard as you can for as fast as you can for as long as you can and you just kind of power through it. And that's actually what the folks at GitHub saw in May, when they run an analysis of how developers commit times and level of work that they were committing and how they were working. In the first couple months of COVID, was progressing, they found that developers, at least in the Pacific Time Zone, were actually increasing their work volume, maybe 'cause they didn't have two hour commutes, or maybe because they work stuck away in their homes, but for whatever reason, they were doing more work. And it's almost like, if you've ever run a marathon, the first mile or two in the marathon, you feel great, you just want to run and you want to power through it, you want to go hard. And if you do that, by the time you get to mile 18 or 19, you're going to be gassed, sucking for wind. And that's I think where we're starting to hit. So as we start to gear our development shops up for the reality that most of us won't be returning into an office until 2021 at the earliest. And many organizations will be fundamentally changing their remote work policies, we have to make sure that the agile processes that we use, and the DevOps processes and tools that we use to support these teams are essentially aligned to help developers run that marathon, instead of just kind of power through. So, let me give you a couple specifics. For many organizations, they have been in an environment where they will tolerate remote work and what I would call remote work around the edges, like developers can be remote, but product managers and essentially scrum masters and all the administrators that are running the SCM repositories and the DevOps pipelines are all in the office. And it's essentially centralized work. That's not where we are anymore. We're moving from remote workers at the edge to remote workers at the center of what we do. And so, one of the implications of that is that we have to think about all the activities that you need to do from a DevOps perspective, or from an agile perspective. They have to be remotable. One of the things I found with some of the organizations I talked to early on was, there were things that administrators had to do that required them to go into the office, to reboot the SCM server as an example, or to make sure that the final approvals for production were made. And so, the code could be moved into the production environment. And so, it actually was a little bit difficult because they had to get specific approval from the HR organizations to actually be allowed to go into the office in some states. And so, one of the the results of that is that, while we've traditionally said tools are important, but they're not as important as culture, as structure, as organization, as process, I think we have to rethink that a little bit. Because to the extent that tools enable us to be more digitally organized and to achieve higher levels of digitization in our processes, and be able to support the idea of remote workers in the center. They're now on an equal footing with so many of the other levers that organizations have at their disposal. I'll give you another example. For years, we've said that the key to success with Agile at the team level is cross functional, co-located teams that are working together. Physically co-located. It's the easiest way to show agile success. We can't do that anymore. We can't be physically located at least for the foreseeable future. So, how do you take the low hanging fruits of an agile transformation and apply it in the time of COVID? Well, I think what you have to do is you have to look at what physical co-location has enabled in the past and understand that it's not so much the fact that we're together looking at each other across the table, it's the fact that we're able to get into a shared mind space. From a measurement perspective, we can have shared purpose, we can engage in high bandwidth communications. It's the spiritual aspect of that physical co-location that is actually important. So, one of the biggest things that organizations need to start to ask themselves is, how do we achieve spiritual co-location with our Agile teams, because we don't have the ease of physical co-location available to us anymore. >> Well, spiritual co-location is such an interesting kind of provocative phrase there, but something that probably was a challenge. Here we are seven, eight months in, for many organizations as you say, going from physical workspaces, co-location, being able to collaborate face to face to a light switch flip overnight, and this undefined indeterminate period of time where all we were living with was uncertainty. How does spiritual... When you talk about spiritual co-location in terms of collaboration and processes and technology. Help us unpack that and how are you seeing organizations adopt it? >> Yeah, it's a great question. And I think it goes to the very root of how organizations are trying to transform themselves to be more agile and to embrace DevOps. If you go all the way back to the original Agile Manifesto. There were four principles that were espoused. Individuals and interactions over processes and tools. That's still important, individuals and interactions are at the core of software development. Processes and tools that support those individuals in those interactions are more important than ever. Working software over comprehensive documentation. Working software is still more important. But when you are trying to onboard employees, and they can't come into the office, and they can't do the two day training session, and kind of understand how things work, and they can't just holler over theCUBE, to ask a question, you may need to invest a little bit more in documentation to help that onboarding process be successful in a remote context. Customer collaboration over contract negotiation. Absolutely still important. But employee collaboration is equally as important if you want to be spiritually co-located and if you want to have a shared purpose. And then, responding to change over following a plan. I think one of the things that's happened in a lot of organizations is we have focused so much of our DevOps effort around velocity. Getting faster, we need to run as fast as we can. Like that sprinter, okay? Trying to just power through it as quickly as possible. But as we shift to the marathon way of thinking, velocity is still important but agility becomes even more important. So when you have to create an application in three weeks to do track and trace for your employees, agility is more important than just flat out velocity. And so, changing some of the ways that we think about DevOps practices is important to make sure that that agility is there. For one thing, you have to defer decisions as far down the chain to the team level as possible. So those teams have to be empowered to make decisions. Because you can't have a program level meeting of six or seven teams in one large hall and say, here's the lay of the land, here's what we're going to do, here are our processes, and here are our guardrails. Those teams have to make decisions much more quickly. The developers are actually developing code in smaller chunks of flow. They have to be able to take two hours here, or 50 minutes there and do something useful. And so, the tools that support us have to become tolerant of the reality of how we're working. So, if they work in a way that it allows the team together to take as much autonomy as they can handle, to allow them to communicate in a way that delivers shared purpose, and allows them to adapt and master new technologies, then they're in the zone, they'll get spiritually connected. I hope that makes sense (chuckles). >> It does, I think we all could use some of that. But you talked about in the beginning and I've talked to numerous companies during the pandemic on theCUBE about the productivity or rather the number of hours worked has gone way up for many roles, and times that they normally at late at night on the weekends. So, but it's a cultural, it's a mind shift. To your point about DevOps focused on velocity, sprint, sprint, sprint, and now we have to. So that cultural shift is not an easy one for developers and even the biz folks to flip so quickly. What have you seen in terms of the velocity at which businesses are able to get more of that balance between the velocity, the sprint and the agility? >> I think at the core, this really comes down to management sensitivity. When everybody was in the office, you could kind of see the mental health of development teams by watching how they work, you can call it management by walking around, right? We can't do that, managers have to be more aware of what their teams are doing, because they're not going to see that developer doing a check in at 9:00 p.m. on a Friday, because that's what they had to do to meet the objectives. And they're going to have to find new ways to measure engagement and also potential burnout. A friend of mine once had a great metric that he called the Parking Lot Metric. It was helpful as the parking lot at nine and helpful was it at five. And that gives you an indication of how engaged your developers are. What's the digital equivalent of the Parking Lot Metric in the time of COVID, it's commit stats, it's commit rates, it's the turn rate that we have in our code. So we have this information, we may not be collecting it, but then the next question becomes how do we use that information? Do we use that information to say, well, this team isn't delivering at the same level of productivity as another team? Do we weaponize that data? Or do we use that data to identify impedances in the process? Why isn't a team working effectively? Is it because they have higher levels of family obligations, and they've got kids that are at home? Is it because they're working with hardware technology, and guess what, it's not easy to get the hardware technology into their home office, because it's in the lab, at the corporate office. Or they're trying to communicate halfway around the world. And they're communicating with an office lab that is also shut down. And the bandwidth just doesn't enable the level of high bandwidth communications. So, from a DevOps perspective, managers have to get much more sensitive to the exhaust that the DevOps tools are throwing off, but also how they're going to use that in a constructive way to prevent burnout. And then they also need to, if they're not already managing, or monitoring or measuring the level of developer engagement they have, they really need to start. Whether that's surveys around developer satisfaction, whether it's more regular social events where developers can kind of just get together and drink a beer and talk about what's going on in the project and monitoring who checks in and who doesn't. They have to work harder, I think than they ever have before. >> Well, and you mentioned burnout. And that's something that I think we've all faced in this time at varying levels, and it changes and it's a real, there's a tension in the air regardless of where you are. There's a challenge, as you mentioned, people having their kids as co-workers and fighting for bandwidth, because everyone is forced in this situation. I'd love to get your perspective on some businesses that have done this, well, this adaptation. What can you share in terms of some real world examples that might inspire the audience? >> Yeah, I'll start with Stack Overflow. They recently published a piece in the Journal of the ACM around some of the things that they had discovered. First of all, just a cultural philosophy. If one person is remote, everybody is remote. And you just think that way from the executive level. Social spaces, one of the things that they talk about doing is leaving the video conference room open at the team level all day long. And the team members will go on mute, so that they don't have to, that they don't necessarily have to be there with somebody else listening to them. But if they have a question, they can just pop off mute really quickly and ask the question and if anybody else knows the answer, it's kind of like being in that virtual pod, if you will. Even here at Forrester, one of the things that we've done is we've invested in social ceremonies. We've actually moved our team meetings on my analyst team from once every two weeks to weekly. And we have built more time in for socialization, just so we can see how we're doing. I think Microsoft has really made some good information available in how they've managed things like the onboarding process. I think Amanda Silver over there mentioned that a couple of weeks ago, a presentation they did that Microsoft's onboarded over 150,000 people since the start of COVID. If you don't have good remote onboarding processes, that's going to be a disaster. Now, they're not all developers, but if you think about it, everything from how you do the interviewing process, to how you get people their badges, to how they get their equipment. Security is another issue that they called out. Typically, IT security, security of developers machines, ends at the corporate desktop. But now since we're increasingly using our own machines, our own hardware, security organization's going to have to extend their security policies to cover employee devices. And that's caused them to scramble a little bit. So, the examples are out there. It's not a lot of like, we have to do everything completely differently. But it's a lot of subtle changes that have to be made. I'll give you another example. One of the things that we are seeing is that more and more organizations to deal with the challenges around agility with respect to delivering software and embracing low code tools. In fact, we see about 50% of firms are using low code tools right now, we predict it's going to be 75% by the end of next year. So, figuring out how your DevOps processes support an organization that might be using Mendix or OutSystems, or the Power Platform, building the front end of an application, like a track and trace application really, really quickly. But then hooking it up to your back end infrastructure. Does that happen completely outside the DevOps investments that you're making? And the agile processes that you're making? Or do you adapt your organization. Are hybrid teams now, teams that not just have professional developers, but also have business users that are doing some development with a low code tool. Those are the kinds of things that we have to be willing to entertain in order to shift the focus a little bit more toward the agility side, I think. >> A lot of obstacles but also a lot of opportunities for businesses to really learn, pay attention here, pivot and grow and hopefully some good opportunities for the developers and the business folks to just get better at what they're doing and learning to embrace spiritual co-location. Jeffrey, thank you so much for joining us on the program today, very insightful conversation. >> It's my pleasure, it's an important thing. Just remember, if you're going to run that marathon, break it into 26, 10 minute runs, take a walk break in between each, and you'll find that you'll get there. >> Digestible components, wise advice. Jeffrey Hammond, thank you so much for joining. For Jeffrey, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching Broadcom's DevOps Virtual Forum. (bright upbeat music)

>> Announcer: From around the globe, it's theCUBE with digital coverage of BizOps Manifesto Unveiled, brought to you by BizOps Coalition. >> Hey, welcome back, everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE for our ongoing coverage of the big unveil. It's the BizOps Manifesto Unveil and we're going to start that again. >> From the top. >> Three. >> Crew Member: Yeah, from the top. Little bleep bleep bleep, there we go. >> Manifesto. >> Crew Member: Second time's the charm, coming to you in five, four, three, two. >> Hey, welcome back, everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE coming to you from our Palo Alto studios today for a big, big reveal. We're excited to be here. It's the BizOps Manifesto Unveiling. Things have been in the works for a while and we're excited to have our next guest, one of the really the powers behind this whole effort and he's joining us from Boston. It's Serge Lucio, the Vice President and General Manager, Enterprise Software Division at Broadcom. Serge, great to see you. >> Good to see you, Jeff, Glad to be here. >> Absolutely. So, you've been in this business for a very long time, you've seen a lot of changes in technology. What is the BizOps Manifesto? What is this coalition all about? Why do we need this today in 2020? >> Yeah, so I've been in this business for close to 25 years, right? So, about 20 years ago, the Agile Manifesto was created. And the goal of the Agile Manifesto was really to address the uncertainty around software development and the inability to predict the effort to build software. And if you roll back kind of 20 years later and if you look at the current state of the industry, the Project Management Institute estimates that we're wasting about a million dollars every 20 seconds in digital transformation initiatives that do not deliver on business results. In fact, we recently surveyed a number of executives in partnership with Harvard Business Review and 77% of those executives think that one of the key challenges that they have is really at the collaboration between business and IT. And that's been kind of the case for almost 20 years now. So, the key challenge we're faced with is really that we need a new approach. And many of the players in the industry, including ourselves, have been using different terms, right? Some are talking about value stream management, some are talking about software delivery management. If you look at the Site Reliability Engineering movement, in many ways, it embodies a lot of these kind of concepts and principles. So, we believe that it became really imperative for us to crystallize around that one concept. And so, in many ways, the BizOps concept and the BizOps Manifesto are around bringing together a number of ideas which have been emerging in the last five years or so and defining the key values and principles to finally help these organizations truly transform and become digital businesses. And so, the hope is that by joining our forces and defining the key principles and values, we can help the industry, not just by providing them with support, but also the tools and consulting that is required for them to truly achieve the kind of transformation that everybody is seeking. >> Right, right. So, COVID, now, we're six months into it approximately, seven months into it, a lot of pain, a lot of bad stuff still happening, we've got two ways to go. But one of the things that on the positive side, right, and you seen all the memes in social media is a driver of digital transformation and a driver of change 'cause we had this light switch moment in the middle of March and there was no more planning, there was no more conversation, you suddenly got remote workforces, everybody's working from home and you got to go, right? So, the reliance on these tools increases dramatically. But I'm curious kind of short of the beginnings of this effort and short of kind of COVID which came along unexpectedly, I mean, what were those inhibitors 'cause we've been making software for a very long time, right? The software development community has adopted kind of rapid change and iterative delivery and sprints, what was holding back the connection with the business side to make sure that those investments were properly aligned with outcomes? >> Well, you have to understand that IT is kind of its own silos and traditionally, IT has been treated as a cost center within large organizations and not as a value center. And so as a result, kind of the traditional dynamic between IT and the business is basically one of kind of supplier up to kind of a business. And if you go back to I think Elon Musk a few years ago basically had these concepts of the machines to build the machines and he went as far as saying that the machines or the production line is actually the product. So, meaning that the core of the innovation is really about building kind of the engine to deliver on the value. And so, in many ways, we have missed on this shift from kind of IT becoming this kind of value center within the enterprises. And it's all about culture. Now, culture is the sum total of behaviors and the reality is that if you look at IT, especially in the last decade, with Agile, with DevOps, with hybrid infrastructures, it's way more volatile today than it was 10 years ago. And so, when you start to look at the velocity of the data, the volume of data, the variety of data to analyze the system, it's very challenging for IT to actually even understand and optimize its own processes, let alone to actually include business as kind of an integral part of a delivery chain. And so, it's both kind of a combination of culture, which is required, as well as tools, right? To be able to start to bring together all these data together. And then, given the volume, variety, velocity of the data, we have to apply some core technologies, which have only really truly emerged in the last five to 10 years around machine learning and analytics. And so, it's really kind of a combination of those things, which are coming together today to really help organizations kind of get to the next level. >> Right, right. So, let's talk about the manifesto. Let's talk about the coalition, the BizOps Coalition. I just like that you put down these really simple kind of straightforward core values. You guys have four core values that you're highlighting, business outcomes over individual projects and outputs, trust and collaboration over siloed teams and organizations, data driven decisions, what you just talked about, over opinions and judgment and learn to respond and pivot. I mean, Serge, these sounds like pretty basic stuff, right? I mean, isn't everyone working to these values already? And I think you touched on it, on culture, right? Trust and collaboration, data driven decisions. I mean, these are fundamental ways that people must run their business today or the person that's across the street that's doing it is going to knock them right off their block. >> Yeah, so that's very true. So, I'll mention another survey we did I think about six months ago. It was in partnership with an industry analyst. And we surveyed, again, a number of IT executives to understand how many were tracking business outcomes, how many of these software executives, IT executives were tracking business outcomes. And there were less than 15% of these executives who were actually tracking the outcomes of the software delivery. And you see that every day, right? So, in my own teams, for instance, we've been adopting a lot of these core principles in the last year or so. And we've uncovered that 16% of our resources were basically aligned around initiatives which were not strategic for us. I take another example. For instance, one of our customers in the airline industry uncovered, for instance, that a number of... That they had software issues that led to people searching for flights and not returning any kind of availability. And yet, the IT teams, whether it's operations or software development, were completely oblivious to that because they were completely blindsided to it. And so, the connectivity between the inwards metrics that IT is using, whether it's database uptime, cycle time or whatever metric we use in IT, are typically completely divorced from the business metrics. And so, at its core, it's really about starting to align the business metrics with the software delivery chain, right? This system which is really a core differentiator for these organizations. It's about connecting those two things and starting to infuse some of the Agile culture and principles that emerge from the software side into the business side. Of course, the Lean movement and other movements have started to change some of these dynamic on the business side. And so, I think this is the moment where we are starting to see kind of the imperative to transform now, COVID obviously has been a key driver for that. The technology is right to start to be able to weave data together and really kind of also the cultural shifts through Agile, through DevOps, through the SRE movement, through Lean business transformation. All these things are coming together and are really creating kind of conditions for the BizOps Manifesto to exist. So, Clayton Christensen, great Harvard Professor, "Innovator's Dilemma", still my all-time favorite business book, talks about how difficult it is for incumbents to react to disruptive change, right? Because they're always working on incremental change 'cause that's what their customers are asking for and there's a good ROI.' When you talk about companies not measuring the right thing, I mean, clearly, IT has some portion of their budget that has to go to keeping the lights on, right? That's always the case, but hopefully, that's an ever decreasing percentage of their total activity. So, what should people be measuring? I mean, what are kind of the new metrics in BizOps that drive people to be looking at the right things, measuring the right things and subsequently making the right decisions, investment decisions, on whether they should move project A along or project B? >> So, there are really two things, right? So, I think what you were talking about is portfolio management, investment management, right? And which is a key challenge, right? In my own experience, right? Driving strategy or a large scale kind of software organization for years, it's very difficult to even get kind of a base data as to who's doing what. I mean, some of our largest customers we're engaged with right now are simply trying to get a very simple answer, which is, how many people do I have in that specific initiative at any point in time and just tracking down information is extremely difficult. And again, back to the Project Management Institute, they have estimated that on average, IT organizations have anywhere between 10 to 20% of their resources focused on initiatives which are not strategically aligned. So, that's one dimension on portfolio management. I think the key aspect though, that's we're really keen on is really around kind of the alignment of a business metrics to the IT metrics. So, I'll use kind of two simple examples, right? And my background is around quality and I've always believed that fitness for purpose is really kind of a key philosophy, if you will. And so, if you start to think about quality as fitness for purpose, you start to look at it from a customer point of view, right? And fitness for purpose for a core banking application or mobile application are different, right? So, the definition of a business value that you're trying to achieve is different. And yet, if you look at our IT operations are operating, they were using kind of a same type of inward metrics, like a database uptime or a cycle time or what is my point velocity, right? And so, the challenge really is this inward facing metrics that the IT is using which are divorced from ultimately the outcome. And so, if I'm trying to build a core banking application, my core metric is likely going to be uptime, right? If I'm trying to build a mobile application or maybe a social mobile app, it's probably going to be engagement. And so, what you want is for everybody across IT to look at these metric and what are the metrics within the software delivery chain which ultimately contribute to that business metric? In some cases, cycle time may be completely irrelevant, right? Again, my core banking app, maybe I don't care about cycle time. And so, it's really about aligning those metrics and be able to start to differentiate. The key challenge you mentioned around the disruption that we see is or the investor's dilemma is really around the fact that many IT organizations are essentially applying the same approaches for innovation, right? For basically scrap work than they would apply to kind of other more traditional projects. And so, there's been a lot of talk about two-speed IT. And yes, it exists, but in reality, are really organizations truly differentiating how they operate their projects and products based on the outcomes that they're trying to achieve? And this is really where BizOps is trying to affect. >> I love that. Again, it doesn't seem like brain surgery, but focus on the outcomes, right? And it's horses for courses, as you said. This project, what you're measuring and how you define success isn't necessarily the same as on this other project. So, let's talk about some of the principles. We talked about the values, but I think it's interesting that the BizOps coalition just basically took the time to write these things down and they don't seem all that super insightful, but I guess you just got to get them down and have them on paper and have them in front of your face. But I want to talk about one of the key ones, which you just talked about, which is changing requirements, right? And working in a dynamic situation, which is really what's driven the software to change in software development because if you're in a game app and your competitor comes out with a new blue sword, you got to come out with a new blue sword. So, whether you had that on your Kanban wall or not. So, it's really this embracing of the speed of change and making that the rule, not the exception. I think that's a phenomenal one. And the other one you talked about is data, right? And that today's organizations generate more data than humans can process. So, informed decisions must be generated by machine learning and AI. And the big data thing with Hadoop started years ago, but we are seeing more and more that people are finally figuring it out, that it's not just big data and it's not even generic machine learning or artificial intelligence, but it's applying those particular data sets and that particular types of algorithms to a specific problem to your point, to try to actually reach an objective, whether that's increasing your average ticket or increasing your checkout rate with shopping carts that don't get left behind and these types of things. So, it's a really different way to think about the world in the good old days, probably when you guys started when we had big giant MRDs and PRDS and sat down and coded for two years and came out with a product release and hopefully, not too many patches subsequently to that. >> It's interesting, right? Again, back to one of these surveys that we did with about 600 IT executives. And we purposely designed those questions to be pretty open. And one of them was really around requirements. And it was really around kind of what is the best approach? What is your preferred approach towards requirements? And if I remember correctly, over 80% of the IT executives said that the best approach, their preferred approach, is for requirements to be completely defined before software development starts. So, let me pause there. We're 20 years after the Agile Manifesto, right? And for 80% of these IT executives to basically claim that the best approach is for requirements to be fully baked before software development starts, basically shows that we still have a very major issue. And again, our hypothesis in working with many organizations is that the key challenge is really the boundary between business and IT, which is still very much contract-based. If you look at the business side, they basically are expecting for IT to deliver on time on budget, right? But what is the incentive for IT to actually deliver on the business outcomes, right? How often is IT measured on the business outcomes and not on an SLA or on a budget type criteria. And so, that's really the fundamental shift that we really need to drive out as an industry. And, we talk about kind of this imperative for organizations to operate as one. And back to the the "Innovator's Dilemma", the key difference between these larger organization is really kind of a... If you look at the amount of capital investment that they can put into pretty much anything, why are they losing compared to startups? Why is it that more than 40% of personal loans today are issued, not by your traditional brick and mortar banks, but by startups? Well, the reason, yes, it's the traditional culture of doing incremental changes and not disrupting ourselves, which Christensen covered at length, but it's also the inability to really fundamentally change kind of the dynamic between business and IT and partner, right? To deliver on a specific business outcome. >> Right, I love that. That's a great summary and in fact, getting ready for this interview, I saw you mentioning another thing where the problem with the Agile development is that you're actually now getting more silos 'cause you have all these autonomous people working kind of independently. So, it's even a harder challenge for the business leaders, as you said, to know what's actually going on. But Serge, I want to close and talk about the coalition. So clearly, these are all great concepts. These are concepts you want to apply to your business every day. Why the coalition? Why take these concepts out to a broader audience, including your competition and the broader industry to say, "Hey, we as a group need to put a stamp of approval on these concepts, these values, these principles?" >> So first, I think we want everybody to realize that we are all talking about the same things, the same concepts. I think we're all from our own different vantage point realizing that things have to change. And again, back to whether it's value stream management or Site Reliability Engineering or BizOps, we're all kind of using slightly different languages. And so, I think one of the important aspects of BizOps is for us, all of us, whether we're talking about consulting, Agile transformation experts, whether we're talking about vendors, right? To provides kind of tools and technologies or these large enterprises to transform for all of us to basically have kind of a reference that lets us speak around kind of in a much more consistent way. The second aspect, to me, is for these concepts to start to be embraced, not just by us or vendors, system integrators, consulting firms, educators, thought leaders, but also for some of our own customers to start to become evangelists of their own in the industry. So, our objective with the coalition is to be pretty, pretty broad. And our hope is by starting to basically educate our joint customers or partners, that we can start to really foster these behaviors and start to really change some of dynamics. So, we're very pleased that if you look at some of the companies which have joined the manifesto, so we have vendors, such as Tasktop, or Appvance or PagerDuty, for instance, or even Planview, one of my direct competitors, but also thought leaders like Tom Davenport or Capgemini or smaller firms like Business Agility Institute or AgilityHealth. And so, our goal really is to start to bring together thought leaders, people who've been helping large organizations do digital transformation, vendors who are providing the technologies that many of these organizations use to deliver on this digital transformation and for all of us to start to provide the kind of education, support and tools that the industry needs. >> Yeah, that's great, Serge, and congratulations to you and the team. I know this has been going on for a while, putting all this together, getting people to sign on to the manifesto, putting the coalition together and finally today, getting to unveil it to the world in a little bit more of a public opportunity. So again, really good values, really simple principles, something that shouldn't have to be written down, but it's nice 'cause it is and now you can print it out and stick it on your wall. So, thank you for sharing the story and again, congrats to you and the team. >> Thank you, thanks, Jeff, appreciate it. >> My pleasure, all righty, Serge. If you want to learn more about the BizOps Manifesto, go to bizopsmanifesto.org, read it and you can sign it and you can stay here for more coverage on theCUBE of the BizOps Manifesto Unveiled. Thanks for watching, see you next time. (upbeat music)

>> Announcer: From around the globe. It's theCUBE. With digital coverage of BizOps Manifesto Unveiled. Brought to you by BizOps Coalition. >> Hey, welcome back everybody ,Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. Welcome back to our ongoing coverage of the BizOps Manifesto Unveiled. Something has been in the works for a little while. Today's the formal unveiling and we're excited to have three of the core founding members of the manifesto, authors of the manifesto, if you will. And joining us again, we've had them all on individually, now we're going to have a great power panel. First up, we're going to have Mik Kersten returning. He's the founder and CEO of Tasktop. Mik, good to see you again. Where are you dialing in from? >> Great to see you again, Jeff. I'm dialing from Vancouver, Canada. >> Vancouver, Canada. One of my favorite cities in the whole wide world. Also we've got Tom Davenport, coming in from across the country. He's a distinguished professor and author from Babson College. Tom, great to see you. And I think you said you're at a fun exotic place on the East Coast. >> From Massachusetts, Cape Cod. >> Nice, great to see you again. And also joining Serge Lucio. He is the VP and General Manager Enterprise Software Division at Broadcom. Serge, great to see you again, where are you coming in from? >> From Boston right next to Cape Cod. >> Terrific. So welcome back, everybody again. Congratulations on this day. I know it's been a lot of work to get here for this unveil. But let's just jump into it. BizOps Manifesto, what was the initial reason to do this? And how did you decide to do it in a kind of a coalition, way bringing together a group of people versus just making it an internal company initiative that you know, you can do better stuff within your own company? Serge, why don't we start with you? >> Yeah, so I think we were at a really critical juncture, right. Many large enterprises are basically struggling with their digital transformation. In fact, many recognized that the business (indistinct) collaboration has been one of the major impediments to drive that kind of transformation. And if we look at the industry today, many people are, whether we're talking about vendors or system decorators, consulting firms, are talking about the same kind of concepts, but using very different language. And so we believe that bringing all these different players together as part of the coalition and formalizing, basically the core principles and values in a BizOps Manifesto, we can really start to kind of have a much bigger movement where we can all talk about kind of the same concepts and we can really start to provide, could have a much better support for large organizations to transform. So whether it is technology or services or training, I think that's really the value of bringing all of these players together. >> Great. And Mik to you. Why did you get involved in this effort? >> So I've been close and follow the agile movement since it started two decades ago with that manifesto. And I think we got a lot of improvement at the team level and I think as Serge has noted, we really need to improve at the business level. Every company is trying to become a software innovator, trying to make sure that they can pivot that quickly and then changing market economy and what everyone's dealing with in terms of needing to deliver value to customers sooner. However, agile practices have really focused that these metrics, these measures and understanding processes that help teams be productive. Those things now need to be elevated to the business as a whole. And that just hasn't happened. Organizations are actually failing because they're measuring activities and how they're becoming more agile, how teams are functioning not how much quickly they're delivering value to the customer. So we need to now move past that. And that's exactly what the BizOps Manifesto provides. >> Right, great And Tom to you, you've been covering tech for a very very long time. You've been looking at really hard challenges and a lot of work around analytics and data and data evolution. So there's a definitely a data angle here. I wonder if you could kind of share your perspective of what you got excited to sign onto this manifesto. >> Sure. Well, I have, you know, for the past 15 or 20 years, I've been focusing on Data Analytics and AI, but before that I was a process management guy and a knowledge management guy. And in general, I think, you know we've just kind of optimize that to narrow a level whether you're talking about agile or DevOps or MLops, any of these kind of ops oriented movements. We're making individual project performance and productivity better but we're not changing the business effectively enough. And that's the thing that appealed to me about the BizOps idea that we're finally creating a closer connection between what we do with technology and how it changes the business and provides value to it. >> That's great. Serge back to you, right. I mean, people have been talking about digital transformation for a long time and it's been you know, kind of trucking along and then COVID hit and it was instant light switch. Everyone's working from home, you've got a lot more reliance on your digital tools, digital communication, both within your customer base and your partner base but also then your employees. One of you can share how that really pushed this all along, right. Because now suddenly the acceleration of digital transformation is higher. Even more importantly, you got much more critical decisions to make into what you do next. So kind of your portfolio management of projects has been elevated significantly when maybe revenues are down and you really have to prioritize and get it right. >> Yeah. Maybe I'll just start by quoting Satina Nello, basically recently said that there's been two years of digital transformation just last two months. And in any many ways that's true. But yet when we look at large enterprises, they're still struggling with a kind of a changes in culture. That they really need to drive to be able to disrupt themselves. And not surprisingly you know, when we look at certain parts of the industry you know, we see some things which are very disturbing, right? About 40% of the personal loans today, are being originated by fintechs of a like of Sophie or LendingClub, right? Not to traditional brick and mortar for a bank. And so the, well, there is kind of a much more of an appetite and it's a more of a survival type of driver these days. The reality is that in order for these large enterprises to truly transform and engage on this digital transformation they need to start to really align the business in IT. You know, in many ways and make cover that agile really emerge from the core desire to truly improve software predictability which we've really missed is all that we start to aligning the software predictability to business predictability and to be able to have continual sleep continuous improvement and measurement of business outcomes. So by aligning that of these discuss inward metrics that's, IT is typically being using to business outcomes. We think we can start to really help different stakeholders within the organization to collaborate. So I think there is more than ever. There's an imperative to acts now and resolves I think is kind of the right approach to drive that kind of transformation. >> Great. I want to follow up on the culture comment with you, Tom because you've talked before about kind of process flow and process flow throughout a whore and an organization. And, you know, we talk about people process and tech all the time. And I think the tech is the easy part compared to actually changing the people the way they think. And then the actual processes that they put in place. It's a much more difficult issue than just the tech issue to get this digital transformation in your organization. >> Yeah. You know, I've always found that the soft stuff about, you know, the culture of a behavior the values is the hard stuff to change and more and more we realized that to be successful with any kind of digital transformation you have to change people's behaviors and attitudes. We haven't made as much progress in that area as we might have. I mean, I've done some surveys suggesting that most organizations still don't have data driven cultures. And in many cases there is a lower percentage of companies that say they have that then did a few years ago. So we're kind of moving in the wrong direction, which means I think that we have to start explicitly addressing that cultural, behavioral dimension and not just assuming that it will happen if we build system. You know, if we build it, they won't necessarily come. >> Right. So I want to go to you Nick. 'Cause you know, we're talking about workflows and flow and, and you've written about flow both in terms of, you know, moving things along a process and trying to find bottlenecks, identify bottlenecks which is now even more important again when these decisions are much more critical 'cause you have a lot less wiggle room in tough times, but you also talked about flow from the culture side and the people side. So, I wanted if you can just share your thoughts on, you know, using flow as a way to think about things, to get the answers better. >> Yeah, absolutely. And I'll refer back to what Tom has said. If you're optimized, you need to optimize your system. You need to optimize how you innovate and how you deliver value to the business and the customer. Now, what we've noticed in the data, since that we've learned from customers, value streams, enterprise organizations value streams, is that when it's taking six months at the end to deliver that value with the flow is that slow. You've got a bunch of unhappy developers unhappy customers when you're innovating house. So high performing organizations we can measure their end flow time and dates. All of a sudden that feedback loop the satisfaction your developer's measurably goes up. So not only do you have people context, switching glass you're delivering so much more value to customers at a lower cost because you've optimized for flow rather than optimizing for these other approximate tricks that we use which is how efficient is my agile team. How quickly can we deploy software? Those are important, but they do not provide the value of agility of fast learning of adaptability to the business. And that's exactly what the BizOps Manifesto pushes your organization to do. You need to put in place this new operating model that's based on flow on the delivery of business value and on bringing value to market much more quickly than you were before. >> Right. I love that. And I'm going back to you, Tom, on that to follow up 'cause I think, I don't think people think enough about how they prioritize what they're optimizing for 'cause you know if you're optimizing for A versus B, you know you can have a very different product that you kick out and let you know. My favorite example is with Clayton Christensen and innovator's dilemma talking about the three inch hard drive. If you optimize it for power, you know, is one thing if you optimize it for vibration is another thing and sure enough, you know, they missed it on the poem because it was the game console which drove that whole business. So when you when you're talking to customers and we think we hear it with cloud all the time people optimizing for a cost efficiency instead of thinking about it as an innovation tool. How do you help them kind of rethink and really, you know, force them to look at the prioritization and make sure they're prioritizing on the right thing is make just said what are you optimizing for? >> Oh yeah, you have one of the most important aspects of any decision or attempt to resolve a problem in an organization is the framing process. And you know, it's a difficult aspect to the decision to frame it correctly in the first place. There, it's not a technology issue. In many cases, it's largely a human issue, but if you frame that decision or that problem incorrectly to narrowly say, or you frame it as an either or situation where you could actually have some of both, it's very difficult for the process to work out correctly. So in many cases that I think we need to think more at the beginning about how we bring this issue or this decision in the best way possible before we charge off and build a system to support it. You know, it's worth that extra time to think carefully about how the decision has been structured. >> Right. Serge, I want to go back to you and talk about the human factors, because as we've just discussed, you could put it in great technology, but if the culture doesn't adopt it and people don't feel good about it, you know, it's not going to be successful and that's going to reflect poorly on the technology, even if it had nothing to do with it. And you know, when you look at the core values of the Bezos Manifesto, you know, a big one is trust and collaboration, you know, learn, respond and pivot. One of you can share your thoughts on trying to get that cultural shift so that you can have success with the people or excuse me, with the technology in the process and helping customers, you know, take this more trustworthy and kind of proactive position. >> So I think, at the ground level, it truly starts with the realization that we're all different. We come from different backgrounds. Often times we tend to blame the data. It's not uncommon my experiments that we spend the first you know 30 minutes of any kind of one hour conversation to debate the validity of the data. And so one of the first kind of probably manifestations that we've had or revelations as we start to engage with our customers is like just exposing high-fidelity data sets to different stakeholders from their different lens. We start to enable these different stakeholders to not debate the data. That's really collaborate to find a solution. So in many ways, when we think about kind of the types of changes that we're trying to truly effect around data driven decision making it's all about bringing the data in context, the context that is relevant and understandable for different stakeholders, whether we're talking about an operator or a developer or a business analyst. So that's, the first thing. The second layer I think, is really to provide context to what people are doing in their specific cycle. And so I think one of the best examples I have is if you start to be able to align business KPI whether you are counting you know, sales per hour, or the engagements of your users on your mobile applications, whatever it is. You can start to connect that KPI to business KPI to the KPIs that developers might be looking at, whether it is the number of defects or a velocity or whatever, you know metrics that they are used to actually track. You start to be able to actually contextualize in what we are the effecting, basically a metric that is really relevant in which we see is that this is a much more systematic way to approach the transformation than say, you know, some organizations kind of creating some of these new products or services or initiatives to drive engagements, right? So if you look at zoom for instance, zoom giving away it's service to education, is all about, I mean, there's obviously a marketing aspect in therapists. It's fundamentally about trying to drive also the engagement of their own teams. And because now they're doing something for good and the organizations are trying to do that. But you only can do this kind of things in a limited way. And so you really want to start to rethink how you connect to everybody's kind of a business objective through data and now you start to get people to stare at the same data from their own lens and collaborate on all the data. >> Right, great That's a good. Tom I want to go back to you. You've been studying IT for a long time, writing lots of books and getting into it. Why now, you know, what why now (laughs) are we finally aligning business objectives with IT objectives? You know, why didn't this happen before? And you know, what are the factors that are making now the time for this move with the BizOps? >> Well, much of a past, IT was sort of a back office related activity. And, you know, it was important for producing your pay check and capturing the customer orders but the business wasn't built around it. Now, every organization needs to be a software business data business a digital business, the auntie has been raised considerably. And if you aren't making that connection between your business objectives and the technology that supports it you run a pretty big risk of, you know going out of business or losing out to competitors totally. So, and even if you're you know, an industry that hasn't historically been terribly technology oriented customer expectations flow from, you know, the digital native companies that they work with to basically every industry. So you're compared against the best in the world. So we don't really have the luxury anymore of screwing up our IT projects or building things that don't really work for the business. It's mission critical that we do that well almost every time. >> Right. And I just want to follow up by that, Tom In terms of the, you've talked extensively about kind of these evolutions of data and analytics from artisanal stage to the big data stage, the data economy stage the AI driven stage and what I find diff interesting that all those stages, you always put a start date. You never put an end date. So, you know, is the big data I'm just going to use that generically moment in time, finally here, where we're you know, off mahogany row with the data scientists but actually can start to see the promise of delivering the right insight to the right person at the right time to make that decision. >> Well, I think it is true that in general, these previous stages never seemed to go away. The artisanal stuff is still being done but we would like for less and lesser of it to be artisanal, we can't really afford for everything to be artisanal anymore. It's too labor and time consuming to do things that way. So we shift more and more of it to be done through automation and to be done with a higher level of productivity. And, you know at some point maybe we reached the stage where we don't do anything artisanally anymore. I'm not sure we're there yet but you know, we are making progress. >> Right And Mick, back to you in terms of looking at agile 'cause you're such a student of agile, when you look at the opportunity with BizOps and taking the lessons from agile, you know what's been the inhibitor to stop this in the past. And what are you so excited about? You know, taking this approach will enable. >> Yeah. I think both Serge and Tom hit on this is that in agile what's happened is that we've been you know measuring tiny subsets of the value stream right. We need to elevate the data's there. Developers are working on these tools that delivering features that the foundations for great culture are there. I spent two decades as a developer. And when I was really happy is when I was able to deliver value to customers, the quicker I was able to do that the fewer impediments are in my way the quicker was deployed and running in the cloud the happier I was, and that's exactly what's happening. If we can just get the right data elevated to the business, not just to the agile teams but really these values of ours are to make sure that you've got these data driven decisions with meaningful data that's oriented around delivering value to customers. Not only these legacies that Tom touched on, which has cost center metrics from an IT, for IT being a cost center and something that provided email and then back office systems. So we need to rapidly shift to those new meaningful metrics that are customized business centric and make sure that every developer the organization is focused on those as well as the business itself, that we're measuring value and we're helping that value flow without interruptions. >> I love that Mik 'cause if you don't measure it, you can't improve on it but you got to be measuring the right thing. So gentlemen, thank you again for your time. Congratulations on the unveil of the BizOps Manifesto and bringing together this coalition of industry experts to get behind this. And you know there's probably never been a more important time than now to make sure that your prioritization is in the right spot and you're not wasting resources where you're not going to get the ROI. So congratulations again. And thank you for sharing your thoughts with us here on theCUBE. >> Thank you. >> Thank you from Vancouver. >> Alright, so we had Serge, Tom and Mik. I'm Jeff, you're watching theCUBE. It's a BizOps Manifesto Unveiled. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time. (soft music)

>> Narrator: From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto, in Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is a CUBE conversation. >> Hey, welcome back, everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're in our Palo Alto Studios today, talking about a pretty interesting topic. You probably haven't heard of it, but you're going to know a lot of the attributes and it's going to sound very familiar. And that's BizOps, the concept of BizOps. We've heard about DevOps and DevSecOps and a whole bunch of ops, but BizOps is really a new twist and a new way to think about this. And we're excited to have the woman who actually wrote the book on the topic. She's Laureen Knudsen. She's a Chief Transformation Officer from Broadcom. She's also the co-author of the "Modern Business Management: Creating a Built-to-Change Organization", and a founding member of the BizOps Coalition. Laureen, great to see you. >> Great to be here. Thanks so much for having me. >> Absolutely. For people that aren't familiar with BizOps, give us kind of the quick high level. What is BizOps? >> BizOps is a new way of doing business. Just like Agile changed engineering and DevOps changed how we put things into production, BizOps is changing from soup to nuts. So from concept to cash or strategy to execution, right. There's a lot of... This has been talked about for a few years now, but this is formalizing that structure. So what do you need to do to truly have your strategy linked to your customer base? And so it's creating that umbrella over all of these other ops processes that brings it all together to tie the top to the bottom. >> Right. So, DevOps, right, fundamentally changed, the way the software gets developed. There used to be waterfall, it used to be data market's development document and then a product requirements document, then you put together a plan and you code it for six months or nine months, threw it over the Wall operations, and then hopefully they delivered. That doesn't happen anymore. And that was really set forth about 20 years ago when this kind of revolution happened on the software side. So what's been happening on the business side, and why now do they need their own ops to be pulled into this process? >> Well, sort of in the same way that things happened in the late 1990s, where certain organizations started to realize that that wasn't the most efficient way to create software and came together and created the Agile Manifesto. We've realized that there's certain things in doing business that make us much more effective and efficient. Things like bringing a data stream from the top to the bottom so every level of the organization has the data they need to run their business. Having that trust run throughout the organization, having that communication and that transparency from the strategy to the execution. You know, the global economy is just in dire straits right now, and the world is moving faster than ever. And so being able to respond to that change is vital at all levels of the organization. >> So you wrote the book years ago, I'm sure you've speaking to ton of business leaders, you know, as an author of the book, what were the biggest inhibitors to kind of the adoption of these ops and there must have been something, because why then did you found this coalition? What was the, you know, kind of the founding principle behind the coalition? >> Well, a bunch of industry leaders have come together to realize that in the same way that development needed to change in the early 2000s, really business needs to change today. And to your point, we've been talking about this for a while. Different companies are doing it better than others. And the ones that are doing this well are really heads and tails succeeding above the others. So, it's not easy though. It's not easy to change an entire organization and to change the way you do business. So, the coalition is bringing together some principles and values. We've come together to talk about how we're doing business differently and what actually works. And the main things you need to focus on in order to ensure success. >> Right. But you did it loud and proud with this declarative manifesto and then an event, actually, later this month that you're going to have to really unveil the manifesto, October 15th. I think it's 9:00, or excuse me, >> 11: 00 AM Eastern, 8:00 AM Pacific. Manifesto, right? Just the word manifesto, elicits all types of, kind of emotional response and really strong declarative statement of purpose and mission. So, why the manifesto and what's really the key pieces of the manifesto? >> You know, you need the principles that go along to help you change people, process and technology. And a lot of folks are focusing only on the technology and the data that comes from that technology and all that is key and vital to the way that you run your business differently. It's not the only piece. And so we need to focus on how do we get to bring the people along with us, how do we change our processes to be more efficient and effective. And the four values and the principles that we've created as this coalition, really help companies to do that more easily and to know they're on the right track, in the same way that the Agile principles and the values that brought out in the Agile Manifesto did. >> Right. So, I have a preview version here of the values. And I think it is really important for people to stay kind of fundamental values. 'Cause then everything builds from that and if there's ever a question, you can go back to the values as of a reference point. But just to read a few of, you know, business outcomes over individual projects, trust and collaboration over siloed teams and organizations, data-driven decisions over opinions and judgment calls, and finally, learn responded pivot over following a documented plan. And that seems so, right, so simple and so foundational and so fundamental to the way business works today. But the fact that you have to put this coalition together, and the fact that you're publishing this manifesto, tells me that the adoption really isn't where it should be. And this is really a new way to try to drive the adoption of these values. >> Absolutely. I mean, everybody seems to understand that they need to focus on their customers and that they need to focus on outcomes, but you can't just take something, you know, once you have work in progress and say, well, what's the value of this one piece of work. You have to have started at the beginning to come with the right outcome you're trying to meet, and then ensure that you're doing that all along the path to creating that and to bringing that to your customer base. It's focusing on your customers and creating the trust with your customers as well as through your organization. The data is really vital. Being able to run our businesses on real data and know the reality of the situation rather than at status reports that were created by people saying, yeah, I'm done, but there's no definition of done, right? It's fundamentally changing how we do business, which sounds easy. But as we know because of the Agile transformations that we've done and DevOps transformations that we've done, it's not as easy as it sounds. >> Right. So, why not just try to include more of the business people in the DevOps process? Why the strategy to have BizOps as kind of a standalone activity and again, to have the coalition and manifesto, that means it's super important. Can't the business people participate in the DevOps, or why has that not really been effective? >> It's really a different part of the business. And BizOps is a framework that pulls together all of these other operational pieces. So, security, operations, you know, how do you get something from engineering out to your customers, really were DevOps focuses, right? So, that's great. But running your business includes a lot more than your IT organization or your engineering teams. So this really expands out and brings in all of the rest of the business for how you sell software, how you plan, how you fund your teams, how you look at the work from that high strategic level and ensuring that you create that solid pipeline of data so that you truly know the status of any strategy in your organization. I was working with one group who had really good strategies and they had really good execution and they found that they spent over $100 million annually rolling up that data to try and understand the true status of their strategies. So companies are spending and are being very inefficient in, you know, they're spending millions of dollars on trying to do this link where if you just fundamentally change the way you do business a little bit, day to day, you can have that as a natural outcome of your processes. >> Right. 'Cause you've talked about on some of this stuff about using it as a way to do prioritization and to make sure you're not spending money places that you shouldn't. Another thing that strikes me as I go through the principles are, again, things that in 2020 should not be new information, you know, frequent changes, which was not part of the old paradigm. Trust and transparency. And I think you even tied it back into one of the articles I saw, tying trust and transparency really back to employee engagement, which then drives profitability and productivity. So I wonder if you can talk about the role of trust and in your conversations with people, as you've been kind of developing this idea over the years since the book, getting leaders to, you know, to trust their people, to do what that needs to be done rather than managing tasks, you know, manage the outcome, not manage tasks. >> Right. This is really important. Having trust in your organizations, especially today when everyone's remote, right? And in almost every company in the globe right now, most of their employees are working from their houses. You can't really do command and control well when no one is sitting in your building with you. So being able to have that trust to truly trust in your employees, you know, we spend a lot of money on all of these technical folks that we hire, and then we put people in place to try and direct them what to do on a daily basis. And so having... Building that trust within your organization, and it goes both ways, right? Employees need to trust the leadership, leadership needs to trust the employees, but it's not just from the top level to the end level, right? To the team level. It's actually every level in the middle. So this is truly pulling the pieces of work that we've done over the past few years through the entire organization. It's getting rid of what we call that frozen middle, of middle management and making sure that trust is aligned in there as well. And that the communication and transparency is working through that part of the organization. >> Right. Another principle I want to highlight is talking about the role of machine learning and artificial intelligence. Clearly, we all know, right, data's exploding, et cetera, et cetera, and we want to get the data driven decisions. But what this really calls out is that there's probably more data, both in terms of frequency and complexity, than people can really sift through, in terms of finding what they should be working on and what's important and what's not, you know, the classic separating the signal from the noise. I wonder if you can speak to a little bit about the role of machine learning and artificial intelligence, as an enhancer to productivity in this BizOps world versus a threat to people's jobs. >> Absolutely. I mean, like I said already that there's some companies spending $100 million rolling up data on things that computers can do today, even without machine learning and an AI. But when we put that into place, it really doesn't replace people any more than DevOps removed people from the organization. We automated a lot in testing yet we still have test organizations. It's just a different focus and a way of doing business. And this is no different. I'm seeing a lot of companies though start to try and throw all of their data together. And I've recently started saying that they're creating data land fields when they're attempting to create data lakes. And so you really need to understand your data that you're collecting and why you're collecting it and what outcomes you're trying to get from that data so that you can understand your business and you're not just creating, to your point, more noise. >> Right. So let's shift gears a little bit and talk about the event that's coming up on the 15th, about, you know, kind of, what is the role of the coalition? How should people get involved, what's membership all about, and then what can they expect to happen on the 15th? >> We have 10 industry leaders that have come together to author the BizOps Manifesto. And it's everyone from influencers, transformation experts, CEOs of a lot of companies or of organizations. We have people like Evan Leybourn of the Business Agility Institute and Sally Elatta from AgilityHealth, who have come to help author this and are really transformational leaders across the globe. And to get involved, you can go to bizopsmanifesto.org. and you can sign the manifesto. You can align to that if, you know, if you want to bring this into your own organization, we're happy to help work with that as well. So it's a group of industry leaders who are here to help the globe get more efficient and effective in how they do business. >> It's really interesting, right. It's not really an open source project, but it is kind of a co-opetition in terms of, you know, you're reaching out to lots of different companies and lots of different leaders to participate. They may or may not be competitive, but really this is more kind of an industry, kind of productivity thing, if you will, to bring all these people together at the coalition. Would that be accurate? >> It is accurate, but we're also looking to have competitors. I mean, we've... Competitors is an interesting thing today because there's no company just uses one company software, for example, to automate all of their pieces, right? There's all of these products that have to come together and share data today in the same way that we needed to share, you know, access to software. In the past, integrations were really difficult and now, you know, everyone's got open APIs. It's a very similar thing with data today. And so we are working with our competitors and we're working with, you know, like you said, industry leaders. We have Mik Kersten from Tasktop as part of this as well. We're looking at how we can benefit the companies of the world today, much more efficiently and effectively than we have in the past. So it is a group of people who compete with each other, maybe on a daily basis, but also have the same customers and have the need to help companies today, especially in this economy with the pandemic, right. There's a lot of companies in dire straits right now and we all need to come together as business leaders to help those companies get through this time. And anything that we can do to do that is going to benefit us all in the long run. >> Right. You know, it is really interesting co-opetition, is like you say, most companies have everybody's, you know, a lot of different products and people compete as well as having API connections and having all kinds of interesting relationships. So the lines are not so clean, like they used to be. And as we've seen with DevOps, you know, significant delta in the productivity and the responsiveness and the way software is delivered. So, sounds super exciting. We'll look forward to the event on the 15th. I give you the last word. What are you looking most forward to for the big launch in a couple of weeks? >> I'm really excited for people to give us their feedback on what they think and how this benefits them. And I'm excited to help our customers and help the, you know, the big companies of the world get through these next 18 months. I think we're all in for a bit more of a struggled time, you know, at a difficult time, and anything that we can all do to work together. So I'm looking forward to working with other industry leaders on this as well, and to the benefit of, you know, the global economy. >> Right. Well, great. Well, Laureen, thank you for giving us the one on one on BizOps. Really appreciate it. And best of luck to you and good luck to you and the team on the 15th. >> Thanks so much. >> Alrighty. Thank you. All right, she's Laureen, I'm Jeff. You're watching theCUBE. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time. (upbeat music begins)

(dramatic music) >> Hi I'm Peter Burris, and welcome to another CUBE Conversation from our wonderful Palo Alto studios in beautiful Palo Alto, California. Another great conversation today, this one's especially interesting to me, we've got Tiffani Bova who's the Global Growth and Innovation Evangelist of Salesforce. Just written a book, great book by the way, Growth IQ, I guess it's coming out later in August of 2018. But Tiffani, I want to talk a little bit about something that seems near and dear to your heart, the notion of customer engagement and how that gets turned into business strategy. So, let's start there. What is, in your two and half years at Saleforce, what have you learned about customer engagement and how actionable is it, really? >> Well, you know, Peter, it's a great question 'cause I'd say this, you know, I thought I knew the answer to that question when I stated two and a half years ago and I've had the wonderful pleasure of spending time with customers of ours around the world and now I have a different perspective on what that is. You know, Clayton Christensen wrote that new book, Competing Against Luck and it was all about, sort of, the job that you have to do, right? You're going to go from point A to point B, are you going to catch a taxi or you going to catch an Uber. And what makes the difference if the job is the same, regardless of what you're doing. In my mind, right, it's the experience or the engagement that that particular driver or brand has with the customer that is riding in the back of the car, satisfying the need for the job that needed to be done. And when I started to shift my thinking around it's really this experience layer and this engagement layer of how easy is it, how friction, you could apply it to all kinds of industries now, you know. Whether it's meal delivery, or buying a book or buy, you know, software from someone like Salesforce or consulting or watching this show. It used to be you had to go and watch it live or you'd have to watch it on television, now we have very different ways and means in which you can be engaged. So that has been super exciting to me to see it live and in person as brands are really focusing on this importance of the way in which they engage with, connect with and inspire customers to do things with them as their brand of choice. >> So, as I said, Tiffani, I like the book and there is three or points that really want to draw out. I want to start with the first one though. >> Okay. >> Let's go back to this notion of engagement. >> Yes. >> You make the observation in the book and I also have some, a background, thinking about customer engagement, customer experience but you make a great point in the book that your brand is the promise that you're make to the marketplace. Customer experience is the customer side of the engagement. >> Right. >> It seems as though if there's a significant miss-match between those two, that's the first indication you've got a problem. If your brand promise and what is being experienced are not aligned, that says something, have I got that right? >> Absolutely and what's fascinating about that is many brands feel like they're totally aligned and then in mass, you know, research from all kinds of people whether it's McKenzie or Bain or Gartner or Forester or anybody else, you're seeing this disconnection where the brand thinks it's great and the customer's going, it's not that great. The gap between those two things, unfortunately, even with all the advancements with technology, I feel like it's getting wider, right? Because their still sort of, brands are still sort pushing out what they think is interesting and engaging and customers are going, it's kind of not so much. And so, this really a way and I really dug into it in Growth IQ of how brands can figure out, how do I get closer to that by starting with the customer and working their way back in. I mean, it's a long discussed topic of outside in versus inside out, it's nothing new there but now we have this advancements of technology that actually allow us to know what that outside in is telling us at scale, without having to throw people at the problem. >> Yeah, through data collection and other types of things. >> Absolutely. >> But it all starts with that impedance miss-match. >> Yes. >> And as you said, if businesses don't accept that they have a problem they're not going to change. But that is a measurable, actionable thing. >> Right. >> So, if nothing else, if nobody reads anything else out of the book, just that simple idea that it's not MPV, it's not, you know, other types of measures, your Net Promoter Score or other types of measures but it's, basically, is there that disconnect. So the second thing is is that you've observed how it can be made actionable. Now, you've come up with 10, a recipe, or let's call them 10 ingredients of different ways of thinking about what you might be able to do from a growth standpoint. Now, rather than going through all of them, let's just say that they're there but the thing that's interesting is you've come up with a general framework for how you can imagine putting those things together. You call it context combination sequence, what does that mean? >> It, I think it's, I, when I decided to embark on this journey of writing this book I said, you know, what do I feel has been missing, or what did I notice as a pattern as I was having conversations since I was traveling around and talking to customers. And it wasn't the decision that they make of how they were going to grow that was interesting, it was actually the fact that it was rarely in isolation. It was never a single answer to a very complex problem, it was a combination of a number of things. So, if you're going to launch a new product, like that's going to be your growth strategy, well, are you going to launch it yourself? Are you going to do it with partners? Are you going to launch it direct to consumer online or you going to go into retail? You have to then combine the fact that you want to launch a new product with other things to help you grow. Or if you you're going to say I want to reduce turn, it's not just, well, I'm going to lower a price because that's going to be a reason for people to stay, it's, well wait a second, are the platforms easy to use? Can people open a ticket easily? It's always in combination. >> Do I have visibility into whom I churn? >> And to whom I churn, right? But the first place people fail to start, let's to back to your original question of this gap between what customers expect and what businesses are doing is the context in the market has significantly shifted over the last decade. You could say, well obvious technology advancements but I think far more disruptive than technology is actually the customers themselves demanding more from brands. I want you to be better to the environment. I want you to be better socially. I want you to give me more value for what I'm spending. I want it as a service not as a product. I want it in a monthly bill not a one-time bill. I want to pay usage. Whatever they're saying, the customer has changed the context of the market. And I think that's one of the big triggers in this, so you start with context, what's going on, next is what are you going to combine those efforts with. And then the third thing and equally import is sequence. The order in which you do things actually has implications to the likelihood of success of whatever it is you're doing. If you're going to launch into a new market with a new product, and you don't have the infrastructure for distribution or selling or service in place before you launch the product, probably the wrong order. >> Right. >> Right and so if you need to set up the partnerships and the distribution and support and sales and marketing, support within region or translate things to language or do the things that you need to do to marketing materials or websites before you get there because if you launch, the first impression is gone if it's not a good experience for the customer. >> Yeah, you only have one time to make a first impression. >> You only have one time and it doesn't need to be perfect, but you cannot be just completely off the mark because getting them to come back is more expensive than it would of been had you just taken a pause, gotten it right and launched at the appropriate time. >> And that notion of context is also especially important because you identify something you call timing which is related to sequence in the fact that you have to be very honest about what you can and cannot effect. There are some things you may want to sequencing, you may want to fall the sequence. >> Right. >> But if the market isn't going to respond favorably, tell us a little bit about timing and how context shapes and resets prioritization as it changes as well. >> Yeah so, if you think of somebody like a Netflix, if Netflix had started with streaming and not with DVD mail, you know, in the United States at least, not everybody had bandwidth, it was too expensive, it was in very specific neighborhoods and as bandwidth started to make its way into the households and the cost started to decline, then they could say, well, wait a second, is this the best way to do it or could we potentially stream it and start doing OTT types of services? But they had to wait for the technology as well as the customer to catch up with what was possible. So, had they not done mail and started with streaming, maybe they couldn't of held on long enough. And so, mail was a great way to do, I'm going to capture these customers, I'm going to penetrate this base, get them to order more movies and do more things with me. Now I'm going to introduce streaming. Now I have this base of customers which now may want to transition to a new kind of delivery or experience that they want to have with us. And you might be surprised that they still have hundreds of thousands of mail customer including my mom, she still gets DVDs in the mail. And it's a huge profit engine for them, actually allows them to reinvest in the business to expand the streaming services other places in the world which may never get mail service, right. But in the beachhead of it and just let the customers churn out, never getting rid of it, not marketing it but not getting rid of it. So, had those timings been offered different, they may not have been as successful. So, it really has implications to think about what is the customer looking for, what is the temperature socially, what can technology help me deliver? Putting those things together and going, knowing what I know, I don't need it to be perfect but I'm willing to test it and fail and iterate and keep going as long as I keep that context of the market in mind and then the customer, you know, as sort of my true north of making sure that I'm aligning those things again, like we were talking about. >> So let me see if I can summarize that, so you got to get the context, which is-- >> Yes. >> What's really in the marketplace, customer, regulatory, competitor, all those other thing we think about. >> All those things. >> You think about the combination of recipes or combination of responses and then how you're going to sequence them out. Then that sequencing decision then goes back and says and what do I need to redefine about my understanding of context. >> That's right, that's right. >> So I got that right? >> You've got that right and I would tell you that-- >> So your avoiding boiling the ocean. >> Yeah, and that's what always, sort of, when I was trying to figure out what did I want to say in this book. I did not want it to be a boil of the ocean. I picked 10 paths to growth, none of which I think will be a surprise to anybody. It's a modernization on what Ansoff had done around the Ansoff four, there's that. There are things that now we have at our disposal which we didn't have at our disposal in 1957 when Ansoff came out. >> Yeah. >> I mean, so, you have to obviously introduce new things. So like, just using something like socially conscious enterprise was not something we were talking about 10 years ago. >> Right. >> But it's being used as a growth path now. And so, I wanted to try to give 10 very distinct growth paths so that people didn't feel overwhelmed by the hundreds of choices they could make. So if I could get it to something that was digestible and then say now, how do I put those things together. So I made natural associations between paths so that people would say, oh, if I'm going to do product and customer diversification, I might need to do partnerships. If I have a churn problem, I may need to optimize sales. Those two things fit together, right? If I'm going to, customer experience is at the foundation of everything. >> Right. >> Right, and so I tried to tell the story that people could say, oh, we're already on this path, should be stay on this path? Is it the right path? Should we be moving? Am I doing everything I could be doing to make this path be more effective? And that's what I was hoping to get out this is that I don't want people to think this is something completely flip the chessboard over and start from scratch. >> Right. >> I want you to pivot ever so slowly and make adjustments in real time so that you're not having to do, this is kind of an evolutionary versus revolutionary kind of transformation. >> Yeah, the strategies that seem to work today, or feature three things and kind of comes from Cluetrain Manifesto, agile, the empirical, they're based on data, they're optimistic, they identify what really can be done and their irritative, they take smaller steps when they do that. >> Yes. >> So, let me return back to kind of the notion of engagement, just for a second. >> Sure. >> One of the reasons why this book has so much prescriptive power is because there is a dramatic shift globally in market power. It used to be the sellers had the market power and therefore the information at your disposal that you used to make a decision largely came from the sellers and now, you're able to move into communities where buyers can come together and identify themselves in each other and use that source of information to help you make decisions. Very, very significant and profound shift and that's in many respects what's driving experience. Historically though, we've talked about sales and marketing alignment. (Tiffani laughing) About how we got to get the right message out, we got to enable sales in the right way. But customers spend most of their time with a brand in the form of a product or service which suggests that he whole notion of customer service and sustaining alignment between expectations and actuality in the customer service function becomes especially important. Have I got that right? >> You nailed it, I mean, I would say also you know, and I'm actually a practitioner before I was at Gartner, so I actually ran a division of Gateway computers, I ran sales and marketing for them. Before that I worked in web hosting company, we were the largest web hoster in the United States, we were actually four times the size of Rackspace. I was the beta client for ALOQUA, I was the beta client for Constant Contact. I was socially selling in 2000. Our shared property is web.com, if you watch golf. And so I was super early, so I'm actually a sales, I sort of say I'm a recovering seller, I bleed sales blood. (Peter laughing) And so when I was running both sales and marketing, I could argue with myself. But when I was just selling, you know, I understand this, you know, marketing giving us leads, sales not doing something with it. Then when I had customer service, you know, those three things together, I think today, is where companies really miss an opportunity. That just getting new customers in the door and it's so much more expensive to recruit new customers and to pay to get them versus just mining the gold you've already got. So, that is something that I'd say over the last two and a half years now that I'm here and I see it at scale that I will have conversations with CMOs and heads of sales and then the head of customer service is not in the room or it's just marketing and sales. So the same way marketing enables sales, they need to enable customer service. >> And, very importantly, the information that is being generated out of customer service-- >> Absolutely. >> Need to enable sales and marketing. >> Absolutely-- >> And in products. >> So I would tell you that in my opinion, the disconnection between what customers expect and businesses are doing actually is a manifestation of the unintentional consequence of the disconnection of teams because of the disconnection of metrics. Sales is very much, like how much did you sell? I mean, I'm over simplifying but how much did you sell. Marketing, how many leads did you, good or bad, how many leads? Customer service, how quickly did you get someone off the phone and how many calls did, tickets did you close today? Those three things pull those three groups in very different directions. So, something like a Net Promoter Score or churn or lifetime values, something can thread those three groups together in a metric so that people know that they're all in this together even though they play different roles. And so, I think the fact that people try to own customer experience worries me because I think the whole company has to be very focused on... >> It's a CEO job. >> But then it's a cultural shift, right? >> Absolutely. >> It's about culture, it's about this customer wants to have me help their problem but I have to get off the phone in two minutes because that's my quota and so do I get off the phone in two minutes or do I help my customer? >> Okay, let me make one quick comment and I'm going to ask you one last question. >> Yeah. >> And the quick comment I'll make is very prominent CEO of a very, very large computing company once said to me, I asked this person, 'cause I thought that they had won large because of marketing. And I said, so, tell me about he role of marketing within your company. And this person said to me, oh, marketing is what I put between engineering and sales so they don't kill each other. (Tiffani laughing) And I think that needs, obviously that orientation needs to change. But the last thing I wanted to talk about is one of the patterns you noted is disruption or disruptive-- >> Yes. >> I don't remember exactly what you called it but it boiled down, it could mean a lot of things, but you specifically focused on and you've already mentioned it, social good. >> Yep. >> As part of a strategy, give us a, you know 30 second, 44 second, why is social good becoming a viable strategy or viable pattern, one of the combinations that's working today? >> Well, I'd say, Salesforce was founded on the 1-1-1 model, which was very much about sort of this doing well by doing good, or doing good by doing good. But I would say this that even if you've watched television commercials over the last year, especially since Super Bowl last year, you'll see brands actually making statements about how they do well for the environment, how they're giving back, how they're hiring veterans, how they're doing things for... You know, Starbucks just announced they're going to- >> How they're willing to fly immigrant children home if they need to. >> Yeah, Starbucks is not doing a Starbucks in DC that will be signing so for hearing impaired. So you see people really making pivots and actually using that as I'm trying to connect with my constituency and my customer base in a new and different way. I love the fact that social consciousness is now getting into Unilever and getting into, you know the 1-1-1 model spread across 3,000 companies now. Or the Tom's model, one for one, buy a shoe, a shoe gets donated. You see it happening with a lot of start ups now where they're trying to start the company that way. Now, if you have a company that didn't start that way, there's not reason why you can't start to find a place where you can inject it going forward. But I'm super excited about that. >> Tiffani Bova, Global Growth Innovation Evangelist Salesforce, talking about the book Growth IQ. Again, great book. >> Thank you. >> Very prescriptive and I mean, I generally hate business books, lot of case studies. Thanks very much for being on theCUBE. >> Thank you for having me, peter, it's been a pleasure. >> Absolutely, so once again, thanks for participating in our CUBE Conversation and until the next one, we'll see you soon. (dramatic music)

>> Announcer: Live from Orlando, Florida. It's the Cube. Covering, Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing brought to you by Silicon Angle Media. >> Welcome back to the Cube's coverage of the Grace Hopper Conference here in Orlando, Florida. I'm your host Rebecca Knight. We're joined by Jarvis Sam, he is the manager of global diversity issues at Snap Inc. Welcome. >> Thank you so much for having me. I'm really happy to be here. >> So, I've gotta--first of all, you're wearing a Rosie the Riveter shirt, we've got these tchotchkes here, can you explain to our viewers a little bit about them? We got to, we got to talk about these first. >> Of course, so, the shirt was actually inspired by our Lady Chilla, that's our local women employee resource group at Snap. The idea was take the ghost, a representative mascot of Snap Inc. and parlay that with the idea of Rosie the Riveter, of course powerful in her own right. >> Rebecca: Alright, I love it, and then these spectacles are...? >> Yeah, so spectacles are Snap Inc.'s first ever hardware product released earlier this year. They allow for you to take an in-the-moment Snap, to be featured on your phone, using Bluetooth technology for iPhones and then WiFi technology for Android. They allow individual users to record Snaps on their phone, while of course not distorting the experience of being able to use their hands in the moment. >> Rebecca: So, I love it, these are the recruiting tactics: your own products. >> Exactly >> Want to play with these toys? Come work for us? >> Yes! >> So, tell us a little bit about what you do, Jarvis. Before you were at Snap, you were at Google. You were interested in really engaging in these diversity issues. So what do you at Snap? >> Yeah, so, at Snap, I manage our global diversity effort. What that includes is analyzing the diversity framework across three key verticals; first on the pipeline layer. So, what are we doing by way of K-12 education to ensure communities of color as well as women-- >> Rebecca: K-12? Wow. >> Exactly. >> Have specific opportunities in the space to be impactful. We often create this framework or archetype for what we think is ineffective software engineer for example or account manager. Reframing that by providing access and opportunity is showcase to people that the image that we have is not always the image that we want to portray, is critical. Next then we focus heavily on the idea of the candidate, so candidate experience. Deep diving into understanding key talent acquisition measures as well as key HR practices that will allow for us to create the best experience, moves us forward in that regard. But then finally, and this is where we get to the whole global perspective. Is the idea of the employee. Creating a nurturing community where the idea of psychological safety is not only bolstered but ensuring that your community feels empowered to the idea of inclusion. Making sure inclusion is not just a seat at the table but rather a voice in the conversation that can be actioned upon. >> So I want to dig into that a little bit, this voice in the conversation. Before the cameras were rolling you were talking about these very difficult candid conversations that employees at same have. Tell our viewers a little bit more about that. >> Yeah, so I think one of the greatest challenges across the tech industry and at Snap as well is the idea of referral networks. The tech industry on its own right has grown so greatly out of referral networks. People that you have worked with perviously, people that have the same academic or pedagogical experience as you. The problem with that is, the traditional network analysis would seem to let us know that you often refer people who look like you, or come from a similar internal dimension background as yourself. In a community that's largely rooted in a dominated discourse by white or Asian males. That means that we're continuing to perpetuate that exact same type of rhetoric. >> Rebecca: That's who you're recruiting. >> Exactly. And so then idea of getting more women or communities of color involved in that space can often be distorted. So that remains a challenge that we as a company as well as the tech industry need to overcome is understanding; one, how do we encourage more diverse referrals over time. But then two, creating an ecosystem where this seems natural and not like an artificial standard. >> Okay, so how do you do it? I mean that we've pinpointed the problem and it absolutely is a problem, but what are the kinds of things that Snap is doing to improve the referral process? >> So it's the idea of being innovative by design. One thing that's unique about Snap in particular is that we are an LA-based company. >> So based out of Venice Beach and Santa Monica, California. We don't face a lot of the core challenges that we see in Silicon Valley. And as a result have the opportunity to be more innovative in our approach. As a result when we look to referral networks in particular. One thing that Snap has focused on is the idea of diversity recruiting as a core pillar or tenant of all of our employee research groups. Not only do they join us to attend conferences like Grace Hopper, like the National Society of Black Engineers. But we actually do sourcing jams. Where we sit down with them and mine their networks. Either on LinkedIn-- >> Rebecca: Sourcing jams? >> Yes >> Rebecca: I love it. >> Yes Either on LinkedIn or GitHub or any of the various professional networking sites that they work on. Or technical networking sites to find out who are great talents that they've worked with before. >> Who do you know? Who can join us? >> Exactly. And what's more significant than that, is creating a sense of empowerment where we actually having them reach out to their network as opposed to a recruiter. This creates more of a warm and welcoming environment for the candidate. Where the idea of being a simple passive candidate is further explored by activating them to showcase how your experience has been great. >> And how are you also ensuring that the experience at Snap is great, particularly for women and people of color? >> Yes, so one area is our employee resource group. So we have a couple, so Lady Chilla is of course what I am wearing today. But Snap Noir for the black community. Snap Pride for the LGTBQ plus community and Low Snaps for the Latin X community. >> Rebecca: How big is Snap, we should just-- >> Yeah, about 3,000 people globally. >> Okay, 3,000. Okay, wow. >> And so one of the exciting things that we do is ERG that. So it's where we bring all of our employee resource groups together and they hold massive events every single quarter. To encourage other communities that are either allies or individuals of the sociological out group to understand what they do. But this deploys in so many different ways. In June, for Pride for example, we held drag bingo. Where our LGTBQ plus community participated. In March, we did a whole series of events celebrating women in engineering, women in sales, and women in media that resulted in a large expanse of events allowing for people to come in and learn about, not only the female experience more broadly, but particularly at Snap and some of the great endeavors that they're working on. >> And I know you are also working with other organizations like Girls Who Code, Women Who Code, Made with Code. Can you tell the viewers a little bit more about Snap's involvement. >> 100% Made with Code is one of the most exciting projects that I've had the opportunity to work on. It was for me personally this great combination of working with my previous employer Google, and Snap. So Google's Made with Code project is an idea that started to empower teen girls to code, ages 13 to 18 primarily. What they found is was that's exactly the same demographic that primarily uses our product. And so about three months ago, we decided to come together to launch an imitative where we'd have teen girls make geofilters, one of Snap's core products. The project actually launched one week ago, and teen girls are using Blocky technology to actually go about creating their own geofilters. And then writing a 100 word personal statement defining what their vision for the future of technology is. I'm personally exciting to say after checking the numbers this morning, more than 22,000 girls have already submitted responses to participate. And they will culminate in an event, November 1 through 3. Where we will take the top five finalists to TED Women in New Orleans. To not only showcase women who have done incredible things in the past and present. But also showcase their work at participating in this competition, as the women of technology for the future. >> Rebecca: And the next generation. >> Exactly. >> So we're running out of time here, but I want to just talk finally about the headlines. It's very depressing, you know the Google Manifesto, the sexism that we've seen against women. The racism in the industry. These are are-- we don't want to talk about it at this celebration of computing because we want to focus on the positives. And yet, where do you feel, particularly because you have worked at large tech companies, on these issues for a while now? >> Not facing challenges head on is going to be the greatest threat to the tech industry. The idea of avoiding conversation and avoiding sheer communication of these challenging issues will continue to raise-- >> Rebecca: And ignoring the bad behavior. >> Exactly, and it results in negative rhetoric that inherently put these communities out of wanting to work in this specific industry. But arguably given that technology not only represents the face of the future but how every single product and entity is made for the future, we have to include individuals. Everyone often wants to highlight the McKinsey study from Diversity Matters. Highlighting all of these great ways of diversity impacting business, but we need to look at it in addition from an ethic standpoint. The idea that technology represents how we are building our future. Leaving entire communities out of that primarily focusing on people of color and women, will result in a space where these communities will never have access, opportunity and thus employment to exist in this space. Being able to attack these issues head on, address the bad behavior, highlight what the potential implication is step one. Step two though is being proactive in everything that we're doing, to attempt to ameliorate that from the beginning. You'll notice one thing that's very different about Snap's diversity strategy is we seek to build infrastructure first, then focus on talent acquisition. Once we can ensure that communities of color and women are entering a space that is psychologically safe, open, and inviting. Then we can focus on how we're bringing in talent effectively so that the idea of retention and advancement is not an afterthought but rather top of mind. >> Right, because you can't recruit them if they haven't had the opportunities to begin with. >> Exactly, and that's what Snap often upholds the value of the idea that diversity is our determination, while inclusion is our imperative. >> Jarvis, I love it. >> Thank you so much. >> This has been really fun talking to you. >> Thank you. >> We will have more from Orlando, Florida at the Grace Hopper Celebration of Women in Computing just after this. (upbeat music)