>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> Recent conversations with IT decision makers show a stark contrast between exiting 2023 versus the mindset when we were leaving 2022. CIOs are generally funding new initiatives by pushing off or cutting lower priority items, while security efforts are still being funded. Those that enable business initiatives that generate revenue or taking priority over cleaning up legacy technical debt. The bottom line is, for the moment, at least, the mindset is not cut everything, rather, it's put a pause on cleaning up legacy hairballs and fund monetization. Hello, and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we tap recent discussions from two primary sources, year-end ETR roundtables with IT decision makers, and CUBE conversations with data, cloud, and IT architecture practitioners. The sources of data for this breaking analysis come from the following areas. Eric Bradley's recent ETR year end panel featured a financial services DevOps and SRE manager, a CSO in a large hospitality firm, a director of IT for a big tech company, the head of IT infrastructure for a financial firm, and a CTO for global travel enterprise, and for our upcoming Supercloud2 conference on January 17th, which you can register free by the way, at supercloud.world, we've had CUBE conversations with data and cloud practitioners, specifically, heads of data in retail and financial services, a cloud architect and a biotech firm, the director of cloud and data at a large media firm, and the director of engineering at a financial services company. Now we've curated commentary from these sources and now we share them with you today as anecdotal evidence supporting what we've been reporting on in the marketplace for these last couple of quarters. On this program, we've likened the economy to the slingshot effect when you're driving, when you're cruising along at full speed on the highway, and suddenly you see red brake lights up ahead, so, you tap your own brakes and then you speed up again, and traffic is moving along at full speed, so, you think nothing of it, and then, all of a sudden, the same thing happens. You slow down to a crawl and you start wondering, "What the heck is happening?" And you become a lot more cautious about the rate of acceleration when you start moving again. Well, that's the trend in IT spend right now. Back in June, we reported that despite the macro headwinds, CIOs were still expecting 6% to 7% spending growth for 2022. Now that was down from 8%, which we reported at the beginning of 2022. That was before Ukraine, and Fed tightening, but given those two factors, you know that that seemed pretty robust, but throughout the fall, we began reporting consistently declining expectations where CIOs are now saying Q4 will come in at around 3% growth relative to last year, and they're expecting, or should we say hoping that it pops back up in 2023 to 4% to 5%. The recent ETR panelists, when they heard this, are saying based on their businesses and discussions with their peers, they could see low single digit growth for 2023, so, 1%, 2%, 3%, so, this sort of slingshotting, or sometimes we call it a seesaw economy, has caught everyone off guard. Amazon is a good example of this, and there are others, but Amazon entered the pandemic with around 800,000 employees. It doubled that workforce during the pandemic. Now, right before Thanksgiving in 2022, Amazon announced that it was laying off 10,000 employees, and, Jassy, the CEO of Amazon, just last week announced that number is now going to grow to 18,000. Now look, this is a rounding error at Amazon from a headcount standpoint and their headcount remains far above 2019 levels. Its stock price, however, does not and it's back down to 2019 levels. The point is that visibility is very poor right now and it's reflected in that uncertainty. We've seen a lot of layoffs, obviously, the stock market's choppy, et cetera. Now importantly, not everything is on hold, and this downturn is different from previous tech pullbacks in that the speed at which new initiatives can be rolled out is much greater thanks to the cloud, and if you can show a fast return, you're going to get funding. Organizations are pausing on the cleanup of technical debt, unless it's driving fast business value. They're holding off on modernization projects. Those business enablement initiatives are still getting funded. CIOs are finding the money by consolidating redundant vendors, and they're stealing from other pockets of budget, so, it's not surprising that cybersecurity remains the number one technology priority in 2023. We've been reporting that for quite some time now. It's specifically cloud, cloud native security container and API security. That's where all the action is, because there's still holes to plug from that forced march to digital that occurred during COVID. Cloud migration, kind of showing here on number two on this chart, still a high priority, while optimizing cloud spend is definitely a strategy that organizations are taking to cut costs. It's behind consolidating redundant vendors by a long shot. There's very little evidence that cloud repatriation, i.e., moving workloads back on prem is a major cost cutting trend. The data just doesn't show it. What is a trend is getting more real time with analytics, so, companies can do faster and more accurate customer targeting, and they're really prioritizing that, obviously, in this down economy. Real time, we sometimes lose it, what's real time? Real time, we sometimes define as before you lose the customer. Now in the hiring front, customers tell us they're still having a hard time finding qualified site reliability engineers, SREs, Kubernetes expertise, and deep analytics pros. These job markets remain very tight. Let's stay with security for just a moment. We said many times that, prior to COVID, zero trust was this undefined buzzword, and the joke, of course, is, if you ask three people, "What is zero trust?" You're going to get three different answers, but the truth is that virtually every security company that was resisting taking a position on zero trust in an attempt to avoid... They didn't want to get caught up in the buzzword vortex, but they're now really being forced to go there by CISOs, so, there are some good quotes here on cyber that we want to share that came out of the recent conversations that we cited up front. The first one, "Zero trust is the highest ROI, because it enables business transformation." In other words, if I can have good security, I can move fast, it's not a blocker anymore. Second quote here, "ZTA," zero trust architecture, "Is more than securing the perimeter. It encompasses strong authentication and multiple identity layers. It requires taking a software approach to security instead of a hardware focus." The next one, "I'd love to have a security data lake that I could apply to asset management, vulnerability management, incident management, incident response, and all aspects for my security team. I see huge promise in that space," and the last one, I see NLP, natural language processing, as the foundation for email security, so, instead of searching for IP addresses, you can now read emails at light speed and identify phishing threats, so, look at, this is a small snapshot of the mindset around security, but I'll add, when you talk to the likes of CrowdStrike, and Zscaler, and Okta, and Palo Alto Networks, and many other security firms, they're listening to these narratives around zero trust. I'm confident they're working hard on skating to this puck, if you will. A good example is this idea of a security data lake and using analytics to improve security. We're hearing a lot about that. We're hearing architectures, there's acquisitions in that regard, and so, that's becoming real, and there are many other examples, because data is at the heart of digital business. This is the next area that we want to talk about. It's obvious that data, as a topic, gets a lot of mind share amongst practitioners, but getting data right is still really hard. It's a challenge for most organizations to get ROI and expected return out of data. Most companies still put data at the periphery of their businesses. It's not at the core. Data lives within silos or different business units, different clouds, it's on-prem, and increasingly it's at the edge, and it seems like the problem is getting worse before it gets better, so, here are some instructive comments from our recent conversations. The first one, "We're publishing events onto Kafka, having those events be processed by Dataproc." Dataproc is a Google managed service to run Hadoop, and Spark, and Flank, and Presto, and a bunch of other open source tools. We're putting them into the appropriate storage models within Google, and then normalize the data into BigQuery, and only then can you take advantage of tools like ThoughtSpot, so, here's a company like ThoughtSpot, and they're all about simplifying data, democratizing data, but to get there, you have to go through some pretty complex processes, so, this is a good example. All right, another comment. "In order to use Google's AI tools, we have to put the data into BigQuery. They haven't integrated in the way AWS and Snowflake have with SageMaker. Moving the data is too expensive, time consuming, and risky," so, I'll just say this, sharing data is a killer super cloud use case, and firms like Snowflake are on top of it, but it's still not pretty across clouds, and Google's posture seems to be, "We're going to let our database product competitiveness drive the strategy first, and the ecosystem is going to take a backseat." Now, in a way, I get it, owning the database is critical, and Google doesn't want to capitulate on that front. Look, BigQuery is really good and competitive, but you can't help but roll your eyes when a CEO stands up, and look, I'm not calling out Thomas Kurian, every CEO does this, and talks about how important their customers are, and they'll do whatever is right by the customer, so, look, I'm telling you, I'm rolling my eyes on that. Now let me also comment, AWS has figured this out. They're killing it in database. If you take Redshift for example, it's still growing, as is Aurora, really fast growing services and other data stores, but AWS realizes it can make more money in the long-term partnering with the Snowflakes and Databricks of the world, and other ecosystem vendors versus sub optimizing their relationships with partners and customers in order to sell more of their own homegrown tools. I get it. It's hard not to feature your own product. IBM chose OS/2 over Windows, and tried for years to popularize it. It failed. Lotus, go back way back to Lotus 1, 2, and 3, they refused to run on Windows when it first came out. They were running on DEC VAX. Many of you young people in the United States have never even heard of DEC VAX. IBM wanted to run every everything only in its cloud, the same with Oracle, originally. VMware, as you might recall, tried to build its own cloud, but, eventually, when the market speaks and reveals what seems to be obvious to analysts, years before, the vendors come around, they face reality, and they stop wasting money, fighting a losing battle. "The trend is your friend," as the saying goes. All right, last pull quote on data, "The hardest part is transformations, moving traditional Informatica, Teradata, or Oracle infrastructure to something more modern and real time, and that's why people still run apps in COBOL. In IT, we rarely get rid of stuff, rather we add on another coat of paint until the wood rots out or the roof is going to cave in. All right, the last key finding we want to highlight is going to bring us back to the cloud repatriation myth. Followers of this program know it's a real sore spot with us. We've heard the stories about repatriation, we've read the thoughtful articles from VCs on the subject, we've been whispered to by vendors that you should investigate this trend. It's really happening, but the data simply doesn't support it. Here's the question that was posed to these practitioners. If you had unlimited budget and the economy miraculously flipped, what initiatives would you tackle first? Where would you really lean into? The first answer, "I'd rip out legacy on-prem infrastructure and move to the cloud even faster," so, the thing here is, look, maybe renting infrastructure is more expensive than owning, maybe, but if I can optimize my rental with better utilization, turn off compute, use things like serverless, get on a steeper and higher performance over time, and lower cost Silicon curve with things like Graviton, tap best of breed tools in AI, and other areas that make my business more competitive. Move faster, fail faster, experiment more quickly, and cheaply, what's that worth? Even the most hard-o CFOs understand the business benefits far outweigh the possible added cost per gigabyte, and, again, I stress "possible." Okay, other interesting comments from practitioners. "I'd hire 50 more data engineers and accelerate our real-time data capabilities to better target customers." Real-time is becoming a thing. AI is being injected into data and apps to make faster decisions, perhaps, with less or even no human involvement. That's on the rise. Next quote, "I'd like to focus on resolving the concerns around cloud data compliance," so, again, despite the risks of data being spread out in different clouds, organizations realize cloud is a given, and they want to find ways to make it work better, not move away from it. The same thing in the next one, "I would automate the data analytics pipeline and focus on a safer way to share data across the states without moving it," and, finally, "The way I'm addressing complexity is to standardize on a single cloud." MonoCloud is actually a thing. We're hearing this more and more. Yes, my company has multiple clouds, but in my group, we've standardized on a single cloud to simplify things, and this is a somewhat dangerous trend, because it's creating even more silos and it's an opportunity that needs to be addressed, and that's why we've been talking so much about supercloud is a cross-cloud, unifying, architectural framework, or, perhaps, it's a platform. In fact, that's a question that we will be exploring later this month at Supercloud2 live from our Palo Alto Studios. Is supercloud an architecture or is it a platform? And in this program, we're featuring technologists, analysts, practitioners to explore the intersection between data and cloud and the future of cloud computing, so, you don't want to miss this opportunity. Go to supercloud.world. You can register for free and participate in the event directly. All right, thanks for listening. That's a wrap. I'd like to thank Alex Myerson, who's on production and manages our podcast, Ken Schiffman as well, Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight, they helped get the word out on social media, and in our newsletters, and Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com. He does some great editing. Thank you, all. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you've got to do is search "breaking analysis podcasts." I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can email me directly at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me, @Dante, or comment on our LinkedIn posts. By all means, check out etr.ai. They get the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. We'll be doing our annual predictions post in a few weeks, once the data comes out from the January survey. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, everybody, and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis." (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Good morning everybody. Welcome back to Las Vegas. This is day four of theCUBE's wall-to-wall coverage of our Super Bowl, aka AWS re:Invent 2022. I'm here with my co-host, Paul Gillin. My name is Dave Vellante. Sanjay Poonen is in the house, CEO and president of Cohesity. He's sitting in as our guest market watcher, market analyst, you know, deep expertise, new to the job at Cohesity. He was kind enough to sit in, and help us break down what's happening at re:Invent. But Paul, first thing, this morning we heard from Werner Vogels. He was basically given a masterclass on system design. It reminded me of mainframes years ago. When we used to, you know, bury through those IBM blue books and red books. You remember those Sanjay? That's how we- learned back then. >> Oh God, I remember those, Yeah. >> But it made me think, wow, now you know IBM's more of a systems design, nobody talks about IBM anymore. Everybody talks about Amazon. So you wonder, 20 years from now, you know what it's going to be. But >> Well- >> Werner's amazing. >> He pulled out a 24 year old document. >> Yup. >> That he had written early in Amazon's evolution about synchronous design or about essentially distributed architectures that turned out to be prophetic. >> His big thing was nature is asynchronous. So systems are asynchronous. Synchronous is an illusion. It's an abstraction. It's kind of interesting. But, you know- >> Yeah, I mean I've had synonyms for things. Timeless architecture. Werner's an absolute legend. I mean, when you think about folks who've had, you know, impact on technology, you think of people like Jony Ive in design. >> Dave: Yeah. >> You got to think about people like Werner in architecture and just the fact that Andy and the team have been able to keep him engaged that long... I pay attention to his keynote. Peter DeSantis has obviously been very, very influential. And then of course, you know, Adam did a good job, you know, watching from, you know, having watched since I was at the first AWS re:Invent conference, at time was President SAP and there was only a thousand people at this event, okay? Andy had me on stage. I think I was one of the first guest of any tech company in 2011. And to see now this become like, it's a mecca. It's a mother of all IT events, and watch sort of even the transition from Andy to Adam is very special. I got to catch some of Ruba's keynote. So while there's some new people in the mix here, this has become a force of nature. And the last time I was here was 2019, before Covid, watched the last two ones online. But it feels like, I don't know 'about what you guys think, it feels like it's back to 2019 levels. >> I was here in 2019. I feel like this was bigger than 2019 but some people have said that it's about the same. >> I think it was 60,000 versus 50,000. >> Yes. So close. >> It was a little bigger in 2019. But it feels like it's more active. >> And then last year, Sanjay, you weren't here but it was 25,000, which was amazing 'cause it was right in that little space between Omicron, before Omicron hit. But you know, let me ask you a question and this is really more of a question about Amazon's maturity and I know you've been following them since early days. But the way I get the question, number one question I get from people is how is Amazon AWS going to be different under Adam than it was under Andy? What do you think? >> I mean, Adam's not new because he was here before. In some senses he knows the Amazon culture from prior, when he was running sales and marketing prior. But then he took the time off and came back. I mean, this will always be, I think, somewhat Andy's baby, right? Because he was the... I, you know, sent him a text, "You should be really proud of what you accomplished", but you know, I think he also, I asked him when I saw him a few weeks ago "Are you going to come to re:Invent?" And he says, "No, I want to leave this to be Adam's show." And Adam's going to have a slightly different view. His keynotes are probably half the time. It's a little bit more vision. There was a lot more customer stories at the beginning of it. Taking you back to the inspirational pieces of it. I think you're going to see them probably pulling up the stack and not just focused in infrastructure. Many of their platform services are evolved. Many of their, even application services. I'm surprised when I talk to customers. Like Amazon Connect, their sort of call center type technologies, an app layer. It's getting a lot. I mean, I've talked to a couple of Fortune 500 companies that are moving off Ayer to Connect. I mean, it's happening and I did not know that. So it's, you know, I think as they move up the stack, the platform's gotten more... The data centric stack has gotten, and you know, in the area we're working with Cohesity, security, data protection, they're an investor in our company. So this is an important, you know, both... I think tech player and a partner for many companies like us. >> I wonder the, you know, the marketplace... there's been a big push on the marketplace by all the cloud companies last couple of years. Do you see that disrupting the way softwares, enterprise software is sold? >> Oh, for sure. I mean, you have to be a ostrich with your head in the sand to not see this wave happening. I mean, what's it? $150 billion worth of revenue. Even though the growth rates dipped a little bit the last quarter or so, it's still aggregatively between Amazon and Azure and Google, you know, 30% growth. And I think we're still in the second or third inning off a grand 1 trillion or 2 trillion of IT, shifting not all of it to the cloud, but significantly faster. So if you add up all of the big things of the on-premise world, they're, you know, they got to a certain size, their growth is stable, but stalling. These guys are growing significantly faster. And then if you add on top of them, platform companies the data companies, Snowflake, MongoDB, Databricks, you know, Datadog, and then apps companies on top of that. I think the move to the Cloud is inevitable. In SaaS companies, I don't know why you would ever implement a CRM solution on-prem. It's all gone to the Cloud. >> Oh, it is. >> That happened 15 years ago. I mean, begin within three, five years of the advent of Salesforce. And the same thing in HR. Why would you deploy a HR solution now? You've got Workday, you've got, you know, others that are so some of those apps markets are are just never coming back to an on-prem capability. >> Sanjay, I want to ask you, you built a reputation for being able to, you know, forecast accurately, hit your plan, you know, you hit your numbers, you're awesome operator. Even though you have a, you know, technology degree, which you know, that's a two-tool star, multi-tool star. But I call it the slingshot economy. This is like, I mean I've seen probably more downturns than anybody in here, you know, given... Well maybe, maybe- >> Maybe me. >> You and I both. I've never seen anything like this, where where visibility is so unpredictable. The economy is sling-shotting. It's like, oh, hurry up, go Covid, go, go go build, build, build supply, then pull back. And now going forward, now pulling back. Slootman said, you know, on the call, "Hey the guide, is the guide." He said, "we put it out there, We do our best to hit it." But you had CrowdStrike had issues you know, mid-market, ServiceNow. I saw McDermott on the other day on the, on the TV. I just want to pay, you know, buy from the guy. He's so (indistinct) >> But mixed, mixed results, Salesforce, you know, Octa now pre-announcing, hey, they're going to be, or announcing, you know, better visibility, forward guide. Elastic kind of got hit really hard. HPE and Dell actually doing really well in the enterprise. >> Yep. >> 'Course Dell getting killed in the client. But so what are you seeing out there? How, as an executive, do you deal with such poor visibility? >> I think, listen, what the last two or three years have taught us is, you know, with the supply chain crisis, with the surge that people thought you may need of, you know, spending potentially in the pandemic, you have to start off with your tech platform being 10 x better than everybody else. And differentiate, differentiate. 'Cause in a crowded market, but even in a market that's getting tougher, if you're not differentiating constantly through technology innovation, you're going to get left behind. So you named a few places, they're all technology innovators, but even if some of them are having challenges, and then I think you're constantly asking yourselves, how do you move from being a point product to a platform with more and more services where you're getting, you know, many of them moving really fast. In the case of Roe, I like him a lot. He's probably one of the most savvy operators, also that I respect. He calls these speedboats, and you know, his core platform started off with the firewall network security. But he's built now a very credible cloud security, cloud AI security business. And I think that's how you need to be thinking as a tech executive. I mean, if you got core, your core beachhead 10 x better than everybody else. And as you move to adjacencies in these new platforms, have you got now speedboats that are getting to a point where they are competitive advantage? Then as you think of the go-to-market perspective, it really depends on where you are as a company. For a company like our size, we need partners a lot more. Because if we're going to, you know, stand on the shoulders of giants like Isaac Newton said, "I see clearly because I stand on the shoulders giants." I need to really go and cultivate Amazon so they become our lead partner in cloud. And then appropriately Microsoft and Google where I need to. And security. Part of what we announced last week was, last month, yeah, last couple of weeks ago, was the data security alliance with the biggest security players. What was I trying to do with that? First time ever done in my industry was get Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, Wallace, Tenable, CyberArk, Splunk, all to build an alliance with me so I could stand on their shoulders with them helping me. If you're a bigger company, you're constantly asking yourself "how do you make sure you're getting your, like Amazon, their top hundred customers spending more with that?" So I think the the playbook evolves, and I'm watching some of these best companies through this time navigate through this. And I think leadership is going to be tested in enormously interesting ways. >> I'll say. I mean, Snowflake is really interesting because they... 67% growth, which is, I mean, that's best in class for a company that's $2 billion. And, but their guide was still, you know, pretty aggressive. You know, so it's like, do you, you know, when it when it's good times you go, "hey, we can we can guide conservatively and know we can beat it." But when you're not certain, you can't dial down too far 'cause your investors start to bail on you. It's a really tricky- >> But Dave, I think listen, at the end of the day, I mean every CEO should not be worried about the short term up and down in the stock price. You're building a long-term multi-billion dollar company. In the case of Frank, he has, I think I shot to a $10 billion, you know, analytics data warehousing data management company on the back of that platform, because he's eyeing the market that, not just Teradata occupies today, but now Oracle occupies or other databases, right? So his tam as it grows bigger, you're going to have some of these things, but that market's big. I think same with Palo Alto. I mean Datadog's another company, 75% growth. >> Yeah. >> At 20% margins, like almost rule of 95. >> Amazing. >> When they're going after, not just the observability market, they're eating up the sim market, security analytics, the APM market. So I think, you know, that's, you look at these case studies of companies who are going from point product to platforms and are steadily able to grow into new tams. You know, to me that's very inspiring. >> I get it. >> Sanjay: That's what I seek to do at our com. >> I get that it's a marathon, but you know, when you're at VMware, weren't you looking at the stock price every day just out of curiosity? I mean listen, you weren't micromanaging it. >> You do, but at the end of the day, and you certainly look at the days of earnings and so on so forth. >> Yeah. >> Because you want to create shareholder value. >> Yeah. >> I'm not saying that you should not but I think in obsession with that, you know, in a short term, >> Going to kill ya. >> Makes you, you know, sort of myopically focused on what may not be the right thing in the long term. Now in the long arc of time, if you're not creating shareholder value... Look at what happened to Steve Bomber. You needed Satya to come in to change things and he's created a lot of value. >> Dave: Yeah, big time. >> But I think in the short term, my comments were really on the quarter to quarter, but over a four a 12 quarter, if companies are growing and creating profitable growth, they're going to get the valuation they deserve. >> Dave: Yeah. >> Do you the... I want to ask you about something Arvind Krishna said in the previous IBM earnings call, that IT is deflationary and therefore it is resistant to the macroeconomic headwinds. So IT spending should actually thrive in a deflation, in a adverse economic climate. Do you think that's true? >> Not all forms of IT. I pay very close attention to surveys from, whether it's the industry analysts or the Morgan Stanleys, or Goldman Sachs. The financial analysts. And I think there's a gluc in certain sectors that will get pulled back. Traditional view is when the economies are growing people spend on the top line, front office stuff, sales, marketing. If you go and look at just the cloud 100 companies, which are the hottest private companies, and maybe with the public market companies, there's way too many companies focused on sales and marketing. Way too many. I think during a downsizing and recession, that's going to probably shrink some, because they were all built for the 2009 to 2021 era, where it was all about the top line. Okay, maybe there's now a proposition for companies who are focused on cost optimization, supply chain visibility. Security's been intangible, that I think is going to continue to an investment. So I tell, listen, if you are a tech investor or if you're an operator, pay attention to CIO priorities. And right now, in our business at Cohesity, part of the reason we've embraced things like ransomware protection, there is a big focus on security. And you know, by intelligently being a management and a security company around data, I do believe we'll continue to be extremely relevant to CIO budgets. There's a ransomware, 20 ransomware attempts every second. So things of that kind make you relevant in a bank. You have to stay relevant to a buying pattern or else you lose momentum. >> But I think what's happening now is actually IT spending's pretty good. I mean, I track this stuff pretty closely. It's just that expectations were so high and now you're seeing earnings estimates come down and so, okay, and then you, yeah, you've got the, you know the inflationary factors and your discounted cash flows but the market's actually pretty good. >> Yeah. >> You know, relative to other downturns that if this is not a... We're not actually not in a downturn. >> Yeah. >> Not yet anyway. It may be. >> There's a valuation there. >> You have to prepare. >> Not sales. >> Yeah, that's right. >> When I was on CNBC, I said "listen, it's a little bit like that story of Joseph. Seven years of feast, seven years of famine." You have to prepare for potentially your worst. And if it's not the worst, you're in good shape. So will it be a recession 2023? Maybe. You know, high interest rates, inflation, war in Russia, Ukraine, maybe things do get bad. But if you belt tightening, if you're focused in operational excellence, if it's not a recession, you're pleasantly surprised. If it is one, you're prepared for it. >> All right. I'm going to put you in the spot and ask you for predictions. Expert analysis on the World Cup. What do you think? Give us the breakdown. (group laughs) >> As my... I wish India was in the World Cup, but you can't get enough Indians at all to play soccer well enough, but we're not, >> You play cricket, though. >> I'm a US man first. I would love to see one of Brazil, or Argentina. And as a Messi person, I don't know if you'll get that, but it would be really special for Messi to lead, to end his career like Maradonna winning a World Cup. I don't know if that'll happen. I'm probably going to go one of the Latin American countries, if the US doesn't make it far enough. But first loyalty to the US team, and then after one of the Latin American countries. >> And you think one of the Latin American countries is best bet to win or? >> I don't know. It's hard to tell. They're all... What happens now at this stage >> So close, right? >> is anybody could win. >> Yeah. You just have lots of shots of gold. I'm a big soccer fan. It could, I mean, I don't know if the US is favored to win, but if they get far enough, you get to the finals, anybody could win. >> I think they get Netherlands next, right? >> That's tough. >> Really tough. >> But... The European teams are good too, but I would like to see US go far enough, and then I'd like to see Latin America with team one of Argentina, or Brazil. That's my prediction. >> I know you're a big Cricket fan. Are you able to follow Cricket the way you like? >> At god unearthly times the night because they're in Australia, right? >> Oh yeah. >> Yeah. >> I watched the T-20 World Cup, select games of it. Yeah, you know, I'm not rapidly following every single game but the World Cup games, I catch you. >> Yeah, it's good. >> It's good. I mean, I love every sport. American football, soccer. >> That's great. >> You get into basketball now, I mean, I hope the Warriors come back strong. Hey, how about the Warriors Celtics? What do we think? We do it again? >> Well- >> This year. >> I'll tell you what- >> As a Boston Celtics- >> I would love that. I actually still, I have to pay off some folks from Palo Alto office with some bets still. We are seeing unprecedented NBA performance this year. >> Yeah. >> It's amazing. You look at the stats, it's like nothing. I know it's early. Like nothing we've ever seen before. So it's exciting. >> Well, always a pleasure talking to you guys. >> Great to have you on. >> Thanks for having me. >> Thank you. Love the expert analysis. >> Sanjay Poonen. Dave Vellante. Keep it right there. re:Invent 2022, day four. We're winding up in Las Vegas. We'll be right back. You're watching theCUBE, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. (lighthearted soft music)

>> From the CUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data driven insights from the Cube and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> A better than expected earnings report in late August got people excited about Snowflake again, but the negative sentiment in the market is weighed heavily on virtually all growth tech stocks and Snowflake is no exception. As we've stressed many times the company's management is on a long term mission to dramatically simplify the way organizations use data. Snowflake is tapping into a multi hundred billion dollar total available market and continues to grow at a rapid pace. In our view, Snowflake is embarking on its third major wave of innovation data apps, while its first and second waves are still bearing significant fruit. Now for short term traders focused on the next 90 or 180 days, that probably doesn't matter. But those taking a longer view are asking, "Should we still be optimistic about the future of this high flyer or is it just another over hyped tech play?" Hello and welcome to this week's Wiki Bond Cube Insights powered by ETR. Snowflake's Quarter just ended. And in this breaking analysis we take a look at the most recent survey data from ETR to see what clues and nuggets we can extract to predict the near term future in the long term outlook for Snowflake which is going to announce its earnings at the end of this month. Okay, so you know the story. If you've been investor in Snowflake this year, it's been painful. We said at IPO, "If you really want to own this stock on day one, just hold your nose and buy it." But like most IPOs we said there will be likely a better entry point in the future, and not surprisingly that's been the case. Snowflake IPOed a price of 120, which you couldn't touch on day one unless you got into a friends and family Delio. And if you did, you're still up 5% or so. So congratulations. But at one point last year you were up well over 200%. That's been the nature of this volatile stock, and I certainly can't help you with the timing of the market. But longer term Snowflake is targeting 10 billion in revenue for fiscal year 2028. A big number. Is it achievable? Is it big enough? Tell you what, let's come back to that. Now shorter term, our expert trader and breaking analysis contributor Chip Simonton said he got out of the stock a while ago after having taken a shot at what turned out to be a bear market rally. He pointed out that the stock had been bouncing around the 150 level for the last few months and broke that to the downside last Friday. So he'd expect 150 is where the stock is going to find resistance on the way back up, but there's no sign of support right now. He said maybe at 120, which was the July low and of course the IPO price that we just talked about. Now, perhaps earnings will be a catalyst, when Snowflake announces on November 30th, but until the mentality toward growth tech changes, nothing's likely to change dramatically according to Simonton. So now that we have that out of the way, let's take a look at the spending data for Snowflake in the ETR survey. Here's a chart that shows the time series breakdown of snowflake's net score going back to the October, 2021 survey. Now at that time, Snowflake's net score stood at a robust 77%. And remember, net score is a measure of spending velocity. It's a proprietary network, and ETR derives it from a quarterly survey of IT buyers and asks the respondents, "Are you adopting the platform new? Are you spending 6% or more? Is you're spending flat? Is you're spending down 6% or worse? Or are you leaving the platform decommissioning?" You subtract the percent of customers that are spending less or churning from those that are spending more and adopting or adopting and you get a net score. And that's expressed as a percentage of customers responding. In this chart we show Snowflake's in out of the total survey which ranges... The total survey ranges between 1,200 and 1,400 each quarter. And the very last column... Oh sorry, very last row, we show the number of Snowflake respondents that are coming in the survey from the Fortune 500 and the Global 2000. Those are two very important Snowflake constituencies. Now what this data tells us is that Snowflake exited 2021 with very strong momentum in a net score of 82%, which is off the charts and it was actually accelerating from the previous survey. Now by April that sentiment had flipped and Snowflake came down to earth with a 68% net score. Still highly elevated relative to its peers, but meaningfully down. Why was that? Because we saw a drop in new ads and an increase in flat spend. Then into the July and most recent October surveys, you saw a significant drop in the percentage of customers that were spending more. Now, notably, the percentage of customers who are contemplating adding the platform is actually staying pretty strong, but it is off a bit this past survey. And combined with a slight uptick in planned churn, net score is now down to 60%. That uptick from 0% and 1% and then 3%, it's still small, but that net score at 60% is still 20 percentage points higher than our highly elevated benchmark of 40% as you recall from listening to earlier breaking analysis. That 40% range is we consider a milestone. Anything above that is actually quite strong. But again, Snowflake is down and coming back to churn, while 3% churn is very low, in previous quarters we've seen Snowflake 0% or 1% decommissions. Now the last thing to note in this chart is the meaningful uptick in survey respondents that are citing, they're using the Snowflake platform. That's up to 212 in the survey. So look, it's hard to imagine that Snowflake doesn't feel the softening in the market like everyone else. Snowflake is guiding for around 60% growth in product revenue against the tough compare from a year ago with a 2% operating margin. So like every company, the reaction of the street is going to come down to how accurate or conservative the guide is from their CFO. Now, earlier this year, Snowflake acquired a company called Streamlit for around $800 million. Streamlit is an open source Python library and it makes it easier to build data apps with machine learning, obviously a huge trend. And like Snowflake, generally its focus is on simplifying the complex, in this case making data science easier to integrate into data apps that business people can use. So we were excited this summer in the July ETR survey to see that they added some nice data and pick on Streamlit, which we're showing here in comparison to Snowflake's core business on the left hand side. That's the data warehousing, the Streamlit pieces on the right hand side. And we show again net score over time from the previous survey for Snowflake's core database and data warehouse offering again on the left as compared to a Streamlit on the right. Snowflake's core product had 194 responses in the October, 22 survey, Streamlit had an end of 73, which is up from 52 in the July survey. So significant uptick of people responding that they're doing business in adopting Streamlit. That was pretty impressive to us. And it's hard to see, but the net scores stayed pretty constant for Streamlit at 51%. It was 52% I think in the previous quarter, well over that magic 40% mark. But when you blend it with Snowflake, it does sort of bring things down a little bit. Now there are two key points here. One is that the acquisition seems to have gained exposure right out of the gate as evidenced by the large number of responses. And two, the spending momentum. Again while it's lower than Snowflake overall, and when you blend it with Snowflake it does pull it down, it's very healthy and steady. Now let's do a little pure comparison with some of our favorite names in this space. This chart shows net score or spending velocity in the Y-axis, an overlap or presence, pervasiveness if you will, in the data set on the X-axis. That red dotted line again is that 40% highly elevated net score that we like to talk about. And that table inserted informs us as to how the companies are plotted, where the dots set up, the net score, the ins. And we're comparing a number of database players, although just a caution, Oracle includes all of Oracle including its apps. But we just put it in there for reference because it is the leader in database. Right off the bat, Snowflake jumps out with a net score of 64%. The 60% from the earlier chart, again included Streamlit. So you can see its core database, data warehouse business actually is higher than the total company average that we showed you before 'cause the Streamlit is blended in. So when you separate it out, Streamlit is right on top of data bricks. Isn't that ironic? Only Snowflake and Databricks in this selection of names are above the 40% level. You see Mongo and Couchbase, they know they're solid and Teradata cloud actually showing pretty well compared to some of the earlier survey results. Now let's isolate on the database data platform sector and see how that shapes up. And for this analysis, same XY dimensions, we've added the big giants, AWS and Microsoft and Google. And notice that those three plus Snowflake are just at or above the 40% line. Snowflake continues to lead by a significant margin in spending momentum and it keeps creeping to the right. That's that end that we talked about earlier. Now here's an interesting tidbit. Snowflake is often asked, and I've asked them myself many times, "How are you faring relative to AWS, Microsoft and Google, these big whales with Redshift and Synapse and Big Query?" And Snowflake has been telling folks that 80% of its business comes from AWS. And when Microsoft heard that, they said, "Whoa, wait a minute, Snowflake, let's partner up." 'Cause Microsoft is smart, and they understand that the market is enormous. And if they could do better with Snowflake, one, they may steal some business from AWS. And two, even if Snowflake is winning against some of the Microsoft database products, if it wins on Azure, Microsoft is going to sell more compute and more storage, more AI tools, more other stuff to these customers. Now AWS is really aggressive from a partnering standpoint with Snowflake. They're openly negotiating, not openly, but they're negotiating better prices. They're realizing that when it comes to data, the cheaper that you make the offering, the more people are going to consume. At scale economies and operating leverage are really powerful things at volume that kick in. Now Microsoft, they're coming along, they obviously get it, but Google is seemingly resistant to that type of go to market partnership. Rather than lean into Snowflake as a great partner Google's field force is kind of fighting fashion. Google itself at Cloud next heavily messaged what they call the open data cloud, which is a direct rip off of Snowflake. So what can we say about Google? They continue to be kind of behind the curve when it comes to go to market. Now just a brief aside on the competitive posture. I've seen Slootman, Frank Slootman, CEO of Snowflake in action with his prior companies and how he depositioned the competition. At Data Domain, he eviscerated a company called Avamar with their, what he called their expensive and slow post process architecture. I think he actually called it garbage, if I recall at one conference I heard him speak at. And that sort of destroyed BMC when he was at ServiceNow, kind of positioning them as the equivalent of the department of motor vehicles. And so it's interesting to hear how Snowflake openly talks about the data platforms of AWS, Microsoft, Google, and data bricks. I'll give you this sort of short bumper sticker. Redshift is just an on-prem database that AWS morphed to the cloud, which by the way is kind of true. They actually did a brilliant job of it, but it's basically a fact. Microsoft Excel, a collection of legacy databases, which also kind of morphed to run in the cloud. And even Big Query, which is considered cloud native by many if not most, is being positioned by Snowflake as originally an on-prem database to support Google's ad business, maybe. And data bricks is for those people smart enough to get it to Berkeley that love complexity. And now Snowflake doesn't, they don't mention Berkeley as far as I know. That's my addition. But you get the point. And the interesting thing about Databricks and Snowflake is a while ago in the cube I said that there was a new workload type emerging around data where you have AWS cloud, Snowflake obviously for the cloud database and Databricks data for the data science and EML, you bring those things together and there's this new workload emerging that's going to be very powerful in the future. And it's interesting to see now the aspirations of all three of these platforms are colliding. That's quite a dynamic, especially when you see both Snowflake and Databricks putting venture money and getting their hooks into the loyalties of the same companies like DBT labs and Calibra. Anyway, Snowflake's posture is that we are the pioneer in cloud native data warehouse, data sharing and now data apps. And our platform is designed for business people that want simplicity. The other guys, yes, they're formidable, but we Snowflake have an architectural lead and of course we run in multiple clouds. So it's pretty strong positioning or depositioning, you have to admit. Now I'm not sure I agree with the big query knockoffs completely. I think that's a bit of a stretch, but snowflake, as we see in the ETR survey data is winning. So in thinking about the longer term future, let's talk about what's different with Snowflake, where it's headed and what the opportunities are for the company. Snowflake put itself on the map by focusing on simplifying data analytics. What's interesting about that is the company's founders are as you probably know from Oracle. And rather than focusing on transactional data, which is Oracle's sweet spot, the stuff they worked on when they were at Oracle, the founder said, "We're going to go somewhere else. We're going to attack the data warehousing problem and the data analytics problem." And they completely re-imagined the database and how it could be applied to solve those challenges and reimagine what was possible if you had virtually unlimited compute and storage capacity. And of course Snowflake became famous for separating the compute from storage and being able to completely shut down compute so you didn't have to pay for it when you're not using it. And the ability to have multiple clusters hit the same data without making endless copies and a consumption/cloud pricing model. And then of course everyone on the planet realized, "Wow, that's a pretty good idea." Every venture capitalist in Silicon Valley has been funding companies to copy that move. And that today has pretty much become mainstream in table stakes. But I would argue that Snowflake not only had the lead, but when you look at how others are approaching this problem, it's not necessarily as clean and as elegant. Some of the startups, the early startups I think get it and maybe had an advantage of starting later, which can be a disadvantage too. But AWS is a good example of what I'm saying here. Is its version of separating compute from storage was an afterthought and it's good, it's... Given what they had it was actually quite clever and customers like it, but it's more of a, "Okay, we're going to tier to storage to lower cost, we're going to sort of dial down the compute not completely, we're not going to shut it off, we're going to minimize the compute required." It's really not true as separation is like for instance Snowflake has. But having said that, we're talking about competitors with lots of resources and cohort offerings. And so I don't want to make this necessarily all about the product, but all things being equal architecture matters, okay? So that's the cloud S-curve, the first one we're showing. Snowflake's still on that S-curve, and in and of itself it's got legs, but it's not what's going to power the company to 10 billion. The next S-curve we denote is the multi-cloud in the middle. And now while 80% of Snowflake's revenue is AWS, Microsoft is ramping up and Google, well, we'll see. But the interesting part of that curve is data sharing, and this idea of data clean rooms. I mean it really should be called the data sharing curve, but I have my reasons for calling it multi-cloud. And this is all about network effects and data gravity, and you're seeing this play out today, especially in industries like financial services and healthcare and government that are highly regulated verticals where folks are super paranoid about compliance. There not going to share data if they're going to get sued for it, if they're going to be in the front page of the Wall Street Journal for some kind of privacy breach. And what Snowflake has done is said, "Put all the data in our cloud." Now, of course now that triggers a lot of people because it's a walled garden, okay? It is. That's the trade off. It's not the Wild West, it's not Windows, it's Mac, it's more controlled. But the idea is that as different parts of the organization or even partners begin to share data that they need, it's got to be governed, it's got to be secure, it's got to be compliant, it's got to be trusted. So Snowflake introduced the idea of, they call these things stable edges. I think that's the term that they use. And they track a metric around stable edges. And so a stable edge, or think of it as a persistent edge is an ongoing relationship between two parties that last for some period of time, more than a month. It's not just a one shot deal, one a done type of, "Oh guys shared it for a day, done." It sent you an FTP, it's done. No, it's got to have trajectory over time. Four weeks or six weeks or some period of time that's meaningful. And that metric is growing. Now I think sort of a different metric that they track. I think around 20% of Snowflake customers are actively sharing data today and then they track the number of those edge relationships that exist. So that's something that's unique. Because again, most data sharing is all about making copies of data. That's great for storage companies, it's bad for auditors, and it's bad for compliance officers. And that trend is just starting out, that middle S-curve, it's going to kind of hit the base of that steep part of the S-curve and it's going to have legs through this decade we think. And then finally the third wave that we show here is what we call super cloud. That's why I called it multi-cloud before, so it could invoke super cloud. The idea that you've built a PAS layer that is purpose built for a specific objective, and in this case it's building data apps that are cloud native, shareable and governed. And is a long-term trend that's going to take some time to develop. I mean, application development platforms can take five to 10 years to mature and gain significant adoption, but this one's unique. This is a critical play for Snowflake. If it's going to compete with the big cloud players, it has to have an app development framework like Snowpark. It has to accommodate new data types like transactional data. That's why it announced this thing called UniStore last June, Snowflake a summit. And the pattern that's forming here is Snowflake is building layer upon layer with its architecture at the core. It's not currently anyway, it's not going out and saying, "All right, we're going to buy a company that's got to another billion dollars in revenue and that's how we're going to get to 10 billion." So it's not buying its way into new markets through revenue. It's actually buying smaller companies that can complement Snowflake and that it can turn into revenue for growth that fit in to the data cloud. Now as to the 10 billion by fiscal year 28, is that achievable? That's the question. Yeah, I think so. Would the momentum resources go to market product and management prowess that Snowflake has? Yes, it's definitely achievable. And one could argue to $10 billion is too conservative. Indeed, Snowflake CFO, Mike Scarpelli will fully admit his forecaster built on existing offerings. He's not including revenue as I understand it from all the new stuff that's in the pipeline because he doesn't know what it's going to look like. He doesn't know what the adoption is going to look like. He doesn't have data on that adoption, not just yet anyway. And now of course things can change quite dramatically. It's possible that is forecast for existing businesses don't materialize or competition picks them off or a company like Databricks actually is able in the longer term replicate the functionality of Snowflake with open source technologies, which would be a very competitive source of innovation. But in our view, there's plenty of room for growth, the market is enormous and the real key is, can and will Snowflake deliver on the promises of simplifying data? Of course we've heard this before from data warehouse, the data mars and data legs and master data management and ETLs and data movers and data copiers and Hadoop and a raft of technologies that have not lived up to expectations. And we've also, by the way, seen some tremendous successes in the software business with the likes of ServiceNow and Salesforce. So will Snowflake be the next great software name and hit that 10 billion magic mark? I think so. Let's reconnect in 2028 and see. Okay, we'll leave it there today. I want to thank Chip Simonton for his input to today's episode. Thanks to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hove is our Editor in Chief over at Silicon Angle. He does some great editing for us. Check it out for all the news. Remember all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com. Or you can email me to get in touch David.vallante@siliconangle.com. DM me @dvellante or comment on our LinkedIn post. And please do check out etr.ai, they've got the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for the CUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching, thanks for listening and we'll see you next time on breaking analysis. (upbeat music)

(energetic music) >> Okay, we're back with Justin Borgman, CEO of Starburst, Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMIS Health, and Teresa Tung is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on to lie number three. And that is the claim that today's "Modern Data Stack" is actually modern. So (chuckles), I guess that's the lie. Or, is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >> Yeah, I think new isn't modern. Right? I think it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually, are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years. Rather than Teradata, you have Snowflake. Rather than Informatica, you have Fivetran. So, it's the same general stack, just, y'know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that have plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >> So, let me come back to you Justin. Okay, but there are differences, right? You can scale. You can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists, and Snowflake you mentioned, its competitors. So that's different. Is it not? Is that not at least an aspect of modern dial it up, dial it down? So what do you say to that? >> Well, it is. It's certainly taking, y'know what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that. But it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data's still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model on-preem still exist. Just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >> So Teresa, let me go to you, 'cause you have cloud-first in your title. So, what's say you to this conversation? >> Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud as we know it, maybe data lake, data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have use query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our- the future goes, right? That's going to very much fall the same thing. There was going to be more edge. There's going to be more on-premise, because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers, right? So, there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data stack needs to be much more federated. >> Okay, so Richard, how do you deal with this? You've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure, it's on the books. You don't want to just throw it out. A lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is, you know, of microservices layer on top of legacy apps. How do you think about the Modern Data Stack? >> Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just 'cause you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data to generate you more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business not just the technology itself. >> Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. Derisked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm taking away that that's not enough. Based on what Richard just said, the modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I buy that. I'm you a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about you know, the, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >> Of how it should look like or, or how >> Yeah. What it should be? >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know Snowflake or what Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of of idealism. They had the benefit of starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. And even those companies, as they grow up, mature out of that ideal state, they go by a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really future proof yourself from the inevitable change that you will you won't encounter over time. >> So thank you. So Theresa, based on what Justin just said, I I might take away there is it's inclusive whether it's a data mart, data hub, data lake, data warehouse, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include Theresa on, on Preem data? Obviously it has to. What are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem I mean most implementations I've seen and data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know adhering to the philosophy there. Maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing, HelloFresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >> I mean, I think it's a killer case for data mesh. The fact that you have valuable data sources on Preem, and then yet you still want to modernize and take the best of cloud. Cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both world. You can start using the data products on Preem, or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or or maybe just tapping into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're going to be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >> Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product wonder if we could give us your perspectives here what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >> So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients, demographics about their their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight and in any business that's clearly not a desirable outcome but when that insight is so critical as it might be in healthcare or some security settings you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >> So that data product through whatever APIs is is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously got to be governed as well. You mentioned appropriately provided to internally. >> Yeah. >> But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today? >> We have and because the data is standard it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and value that that's providing, because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context what does this data mean, and what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case. >> Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains on the data, you know you got to cut through a lot of the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right, let's end. Justin. How does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >> Yeah. So I think for us it's really providing our customers with, you know the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know incorporated into our offering as well you can really create and, and curate, you know data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know model and make that an appropriate compliment to you know, the modern data stack that people have today. >> Excellent. Hey, I want to thank Justin, Teresa, and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. Big believers in the in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are going to be available on the cube.net for on demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and they have awesome resources. Lots of data mesh conversations over there and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the "Data Doesn't Lie... or Does It?" made possible by Starburst data. This is Dave Vellante for the Cube, and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay. We're gonna get into lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you'll, you'll never get performance because you need to be column. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats were introduced to, to data lake. You have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again, like iceberg and Delta and hoote that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a lie and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, the clothes is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect and what you don't want to end up done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen the technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to JAK about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that data mesh is open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to hit and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in hit back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, it's interesting remind of when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the TSR gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you, you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. That that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you wanna use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you and, and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers there, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit yeah, you know, the Jammin us on price and the license cost, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast an ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your business's skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is always a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So IE, it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you command a 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years and in the world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse, it, it fit in this, in this world. >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a data lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understanding holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern or is it the same wine new bottle when it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

(bright upbeat music) >> In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Hammerbacher famously said, "The best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads, and that sucks!" Let's face it. More than a decade later, organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile and data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean, you ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it in a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now, that could mean cutting costs, could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes even data lakes were broken and left us wanting for more. Welcome to The Data Doesn't Lie... Or Does It? A series of conversations produced by theCUBE and made possible by Starburst Data. I'm your host, Dave Vellante, and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is the co-founder and CEO of Starburst, Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMIS Health, and Teresa Tung is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today, we're going to have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled, and yes, broken promises of a data past. We'll expose data lies: big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth inevitable? Will the data warehouse ever have feature parity with the data lake or vice versa? Is the so-called modern data stack simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close? How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data? Can and will an open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes? We're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK, Teresa is on the West Coast, and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in theCUBE studios, about 30 miles outside of Boston. Folks, welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. >> Thanks for having us. >> Okay, let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now, here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >> Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called Hadapt, which was an early SQL engine for IDU that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem, data in the cloud. Those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >> So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, what are your thoughts? I mean, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What does your experience show? >> Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in a platform that's close to data experts people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that businesses just don't grow up like that. And it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of storing everything in one place. >> Teresa, I feel like Sarbanes-Oxley have kind of saved the data warehouse, right? (laughs) You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for some of those other use cases I mentioned, I do feel like the industry has kind of let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralize? >> I think you got to have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like Sarbanes-Oxley, for things like security, for certain very core data sets having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right? To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise, you're not going to be able to scale, right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately, you're going to collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right? External partners. We're going to see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >> So Justin, you guys last, jeez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Zhamak Dehghani. Of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. One of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've got to go through if you want anything. But at the same time, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess, a question for you Richard. How do you deal with that? Do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that build cubes and the like or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with your constituencies that data model? >> Yeah. So we absolutely have got rockstar data scientists and data guardians, if you like. People who understand what it means to use this data, particularly the data that we use at EMIS is very private, it's healthcare information. And some of the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a consulting type experience from a set of rock stars to help a more decentralized business who needs to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >> Justin, what do you say to a customer or prospect that says, "Look, Justin. I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise, I got duplication." What do you say to that? >> Well, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Teradata or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams, as much as they are experts in the technology, they don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenets of data mesh that Zhamak writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. And so by not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized, and to your earlier point about Sarbanes-Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is the data mesh model basically says data's decentralized and we're going to turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're going to turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data the best to participate in the process of curating and creating data products for consumption. So I think when you think about it that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two models comparing and contrasting. >> So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? Teresa, you work with a lot of clients. They're not just going to rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're going to build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the EDW just becomes less and less valuable over time or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases? What's your take on that? >> Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse. I would love it mastered, would love it owned by a central team, right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date, I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's going to be a new technology that's going to emerge that we're going to want to tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things I mentioned: the data products in the systems that are meaningful today, and the data products that actually might span a number of systems. Maybe either those that either source systems with the domains that know it best, or the consumer-based systems or products that need to be packaged in a way that'd be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >> So, Richard, let me ask you. Take Zhamak's principles back to those. You got the domain ownership and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two challenges: self-serve infrastructure, let's park that for a second, and then in your industry, one of the most regulated, most sensitive, computational governance. How do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Teresa was just talking about? >> Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think although a data warehouse makes that very simple 'cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at EMIS is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data mesh, which means that no matter which user is accessing which data source, we go through a well audited, well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is audited in a very kind of standard way regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible, understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach, and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform, and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by the data users. >> Yeah. So Justin, we always talk about data democratization, and up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there, but do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially doing analytic queries with data that's all dispersed all over. How are you seeing your customers handle this challenge? >> Yeah, I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, the people who know the data the best, to create data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively, almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization, and then you can start to consume them as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and start to use with whatever BI tool you may like or even just running SQL queries yourself. >> Okay guys, grab a sip of water. After the short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence. Keep it right there. (bright upbeat music)

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting cost could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting from more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or doesn't a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have featured parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack, simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for hit that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience show? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know, right. You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like star Oxley, for things like security for certainly very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Jamma, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenants of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about SAR, brain Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the E D w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems, maybe either those that either source systems for the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got to, you know, domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two, you know, challenges, self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, the one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at emus is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data match, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin, I mean, Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, do an analytic queries and with data that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah. I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively a almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself, >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After this short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence, keep it right there. >>Your company has more data than ever, and more people trying to understand it, but there's a problem. Your data is stored across multiple systems. It's hard to access and that delays analytics and ultimately decisions. The old method of moving all of your data into a single source of truth is slow and definitely not built for the volume of data we have today or where we are headed while your data engineers spent over half their time, moving data, your analysts and data scientists are left, waiting, feeling frustrated, unproductive, and unable to move the needle for your business. But what if you could spend less time moving or copying data? What if your data consumers could analyze all your data quickly? >>Starburst helps your teams run fast queries on any data source. We help you create a single point of access to your data, no matter where it's stored. And we support high concurrency, we solve for speed and scale, whether it's fast, SQL queries on your data lake or faster queries across multiple data sets, Starburst helps your teams run analytics anywhere you can't afford to wait for data to be available. Your team has questions that need answers. Now with Starburst, the wait is over. You'll have faster access to data with enterprise level security, easy connectivity, and 24 7 support from experts, organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact our Trino experts to get started. >>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay, we're gonna get to lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you you'll never get performance because you need to be column there. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats we're introduced to, to data apes, you have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and Hodi that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, know it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a line and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, look closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen a technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to Shaak about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that the data meshes open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but to come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to Haddo and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in Haddo back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, that's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the tees or gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. Th that that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you want to use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you in and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit, yeah, you know, they're jamming us on price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast in ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your businesses skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is, oh, is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you commander 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years. And in world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse fit in this, in this world? >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a deal lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle? When it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. >>Your data is capable of producing incredible results, but data consumers are often left in the dark without fast access to the data they need. Starers makes your data visible from wherever it lives. Your company is acquiring more data in more places, more rapidly than ever to rely solely on a data centralization strategy. Whether it's in a lake or a warehouse is unrealistic. A single source of truth approach is no longer viable, but disconnected data silos are often left untapped. We need a new approach. One that embraces distributed data. One that enables fast and secure access to any of your data from anywhere with Starburst, you'll have the fastest query engine for the data lake that allows you to connect and analyze your disparate data sources no matter where they live Starburst provides the foundational technology required for you to build towards the vision of a decentralized data mesh Starburst enterprise and Starburst galaxy offer enterprise ready, connectivity, interoperability, and security features for multiple regions, multiple clouds and everchanging global regulatory requirements. The data is yours. And with Starburst, you can perform analytics anywhere in light of your world. >>Okay. We're back with Justin Boardman. CEO of Starbust Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMI health and Theresa tongue is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on July number three. And that is the claim that today's modern data stack is actually modern. So I guess that's the lie it's it is it's is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >>Yeah. I mean, I think new isn't modern, right? I think it's the, it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years, rather than Terra data. You have snowflake rather than Informatica you have five trend. So it's the same general stack, just, you know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that it plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >>So lemme come back to you just, but okay. But, but there are differences, right? I mean, you can scale, you can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, you know, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists and snowflake, you mentioned it's competitors. So that's different. Is it not, is that not at least an aspect of, of modern dial it up, dial it down. So what, what do you say to that? >>Well, it, it is, it's certainly taking, you know, what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that, but it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same sort of structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model OnPrem still exist just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >>So Theresa, let me go to you cuz you have cloud first in your, in your, your title. So what's what say you to this conversation? >>Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud, as we know it, maybe data lake data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have news query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our, the future goes, right, that that's gonna very much fall the same thing. There was gonna be more edge. There's gonna be more on premise because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers. Right? So there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data staff needs to be much more federated. >>Okay. So Richard, how do you deal with this? You you've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure it's on the books. You don't wanna just throw it out. A lot of, lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is a, you know, a microservices layer on top of leg legacy apps. How do you think about the modern data stack? >>Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just cuz you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data, to generate you more, more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data, but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams, we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business, not just the technology itself. >>Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five, seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. De-risked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm, I'm taking away that that's not enough based on what Richard just said. The modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I, I buy that. I'm a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about, you know, paying, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >>Of, of how it should look like or, or how >>It's yeah. What it should be. >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in, in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I, I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know, snowflake or Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's, it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of, of idealism. They had the benefit of it was starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. >>And even those companies, as they grow up mature out of that ideal state, they go buy a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding, you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really Futureproof yourself from the inevitable change that you will, you won't encounter over time. >>So thank you. So there, based on what Justin just said, I, my takeaway there is it's inclusive, whether it's a data Mar data hub, data lake data warehouse, it's a, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include there on Preem data? O obviously it has to, what are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem? I mean, most implementations I've seen in data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know, adhering to the philosophy. They're maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing. Hello, fresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >>I mean, I, I think it's a killer case for data. Me, the fact that you have valuable data sources, OnPrem, and then yet you still wanna modernize and take the best of cloud cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both worlds. You can start using the data products on-prem or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or, or maybe just tap into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're gonna be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >>Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product, wonder if we could give us your perspectives here, what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >>So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients' demographics about their, their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight. And in any business, that's clearly not a desirable outcome, but when that insight is so critical, as it might be in healthcare or some security settings, you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured, managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in, in, in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >>So that data product through whatever APIs is, is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously gotta be governed as well. You mentioned you, you appropriately provided to internally. Yeah. But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today >>We have, and because the data is standard, it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and, and, and value that that's providing because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context, what does this data mean? And what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case? >>Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains own the data, you, you gotta cut through a lot of the, the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that, that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right. Let's send Justin, how does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >>Yeah. So I think for us, it's really providing our customers with, you know, the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know, and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs, store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know, incorporated into our offering as well, you can really create and, and curate, you know, data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know, model and make that an appropriate compliment to, you know, the, the, the modern data stack that people have today. >>Excellent. Hey, I wanna thank Justin Theresa and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. I big believers in the, in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know, we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are gonna be available on the cube.net for on-demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and, and, and they have awesome resources, lots of data mesh conversations over there, and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the data doesn't lie or does it made possible by Starburst data? This is Dave Valante for the cube, and we'll see you next time. >>The explosion of data sources has forced organizations to modernize their systems and architecture and come to terms with one size does not fit all for data management today. Your teams are constantly moving and copying data, which requires time management. And in some cases, double paying for compute resources. Instead, what if you could access all your data anywhere using the BI tools and SQL skills your users already have. And what if this also included enterprise security and fast performance with Starburst enterprise, you can provide your data consumers with a single point of secure access to all of your data, no matter where it lives with features like strict, fine grained, access control, end to end data encryption and data masking Starburst meets the security standards of the largest companies. Starburst enterprise can easily be deployed anywhere and managed with insights where data teams holistically view their clusters operation and query execution. So they can reach meaningful business decisions faster, all this with the support of the largest team of Trino experts in the world, delivering fully tested stable releases and available to support you 24 7 to unlock the value in all of your data. You need a solution that easily fits with what you have today and can adapt to your architecture. Tomorrow. Starbust enterprise gives you the fastest path from big data to better decisions, cuz your team can't afford to wait. Trino was created to empower analytics anywhere and Starburst enterprise was created to give you the enterprise grade performance, connectivity, security management, and support your company needs organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact us to get started.

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data-driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting cost could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data marts, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting from more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or doesn't a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have featured parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack, simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for hit that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Teradata is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience show? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know, right. You actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like star Oxley, for things like security for certainly very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited Jamma, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come. I think that's the story at Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenants of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about SAR, brain Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but what does that mean? Does that mean the E D w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's going to be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems, maybe either those that either source systems for the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to use all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got to, you know, domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue are two, you know, challenges, self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, the one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at emus is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data match, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin, I mean, Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, do an analytic queries and with data that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah. I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively a almost eCommerce like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself, >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After this short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence, keep it right there. >>Your company has more data than ever, and more people trying to understand it, but there's a problem. Your data is stored across multiple systems. It's hard to access and that delays analytics and ultimately decisions. The old method of moving all of your data into a single source of truth is slow and definitely not built for the volume of data we have today or where we are headed while your data engineers spent over half their time, moving data, your analysts and data scientists are left, waiting, feeling frustrated, unproductive, and unable to move the needle for your business. But what if you could spend less time moving or copying data? What if your data consumers could analyze all your data quickly? >>Starburst helps your teams run fast queries on any data source. We help you create a single point of access to your data, no matter where it's stored. And we support high concurrency, we solve for speed and scale, whether it's fast, SQL queries on your data lake or faster queries across multiple data sets, Starburst helps your teams run analytics anywhere you can't afford to wait for data to be available. Your team has questions that need answers. Now with Starburst, the wait is over. You'll have faster access to data with enterprise level security, easy connectivity, and 24 7 support from experts, organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact our Trino experts to get started. >>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of EVAs health. Okay, we're gonna get to lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you you'll never get performance because you need to be column there. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats we're introduced to, to data apes, you have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and Hodi that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, know it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a line and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, look closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen a technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Jess, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to Shaak about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that the data meshes open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but to come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to Haddo and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in Haddo back then. And I think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, that's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the tees or gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up, you mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down. Cause I thought it was an amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. Th that that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use spark to train a machine learning model and you want to use Starbust to query via sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you in and locks you in. >>So I, I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit, yeah, you know, they're jamming us on price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast in ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your businesses skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run at enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud-based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is, oh, is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like PJI Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you commander 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years. And in world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse fit in this, in this world? >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a deal lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access controls so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle? When it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage. >>Your data is capable of producing incredible results, but data consumers are often left in the dark without fast access to the data they need. Starers makes your data visible from wherever it lives. Your company is acquiring more data in more places, more rapidly than ever to rely solely on a data centralization strategy. Whether it's in a lake or a warehouse is unrealistic. A single source of truth approach is no longer viable, but disconnected data silos are often left untapped. We need a new approach. One that embraces distributed data. One that enables fast and secure access to any of your data from anywhere with Starburst, you'll have the fastest query engine for the data lake that allows you to connect and analyze your disparate data sources no matter where they live Starburst provides the foundational technology required for you to build towards the vision of a decentralized data mesh Starburst enterprise and Starburst galaxy offer enterprise ready, connectivity, interoperability, and security features for multiple regions, multiple clouds and everchanging global regulatory requirements. The data is yours. And with Starburst, you can perform analytics anywhere in light of your world. >>Okay. We're back with Justin Boardman. CEO of Starbust Richard Jarvis is the CTO of EMI health and Theresa tongue is the cloud first technologist from Accenture. We're on July number three. And that is the claim that today's modern data stack is actually modern. So I guess that's the lie it's it is it's is that it's not modern. Justin, what do you say? >>Yeah. I mean, I think new isn't modern, right? I think it's the, it's the new data stack. It's the cloud data stack, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's modern. I think a lot of the components actually are exactly the same as what we've had for 40 years, rather than Terra data. You have snowflake rather than Informatica you have five trend. So it's the same general stack, just, you know, a cloud version of it. And I think a lot of the challenges that it plagued us for 40 years still maintain. >>So lemme come back to you just, but okay. But, but there are differences, right? I mean, you can scale, you can throw resources at the problem. You can separate compute from storage. You really, you know, there's a lot of money being thrown at that by venture capitalists and snowflake, you mentioned it's competitors. So that's different. Is it not, is that not at least an aspect of, of modern dial it up, dial it down. So what, what do you say to that? >>Well, it, it is, it's certainly taking, you know, what the cloud offers and taking advantage of that, but it's important to note that the cloud data warehouses out there are really just separating their compute from their storage. So it's allowing them to scale up and down, but your data still stored in a proprietary format. You're still locked in. You still have to ingest the data to get it even prepared for analysis. So a lot of the same sort of structural constraints that exist with the old enterprise data warehouse model OnPrem still exist just yes, a little bit more elastic now because the cloud offers that. >>So Theresa, let me go to you cuz you have cloud first in your, in your, your title. So what's what say you to this conversation? >>Well, even the cloud providers are looking towards more of a cloud continuum, right? So the centralized cloud, as we know it, maybe data lake data warehouse in the central place, that's not even how the cloud providers are looking at it. They have news query services. Every provider has one that really expands those queries to be beyond a single location. And if we look at a lot of where our, the future goes, right, that that's gonna very much fall the same thing. There was gonna be more edge. There's gonna be more on premise because of data sovereignty, data gravity, because you're working with different parts of the business that have already made major cloud investments in different cloud providers. Right? So there's a lot of reasons why the modern, I guess, the next modern generation of the data staff needs to be much more federated. >>Okay. So Richard, how do you deal with this? You you've obviously got, you know, the technical debt, the existing infrastructure it's on the books. You don't wanna just throw it out. A lot of, lot of conversation about modernizing applications, which a lot of times is a, you know, a microservices layer on top of leg legacy apps. How do you think about the modern data stack? >>Well, I think probably the first thing to say is that the stack really has to include the processes and people around the data as well is all well and good changing the technology. But if you don't modernize how people use that technology, then you're not going to be able to, to scale because just cuz you can scale CPU and storage doesn't mean you can get more people to use your data, to generate you more, more value for the business. And so what we've been looking at is really changing in very much aligned to data products and, and data mesh. How do you enable more people to consume the service and have the stack respond in a way that keeps costs low? Because that's important for our customers consuming this data, but also allows people to occasionally run enormous queries and then tick along with smaller ones when required. And it's a good job we did because during COVID all of a sudden we had enormous pressures on our data platform to answer really important life threatening queries. And if we couldn't scale both our data stack and our teams, we wouldn't have been able to answer those as quickly as we had. So I think the stack needs to support a scalable business, not just the technology itself. >>Well thank you for that. So Justin let's, let's try to break down what the critical aspects are of the modern data stack. So you think about the past, you know, five, seven years cloud obviously has given a different pricing model. De-risked experimentation, you know that we talked about the ability to scale up scale down, but it's, I'm, I'm taking away that that's not enough based on what Richard just said. The modern data stack has to serve the business and enable the business to build data products. I, I buy that. I'm a big fan of the data mesh concepts, even though we're early days. So what are the critical aspects if you had to think about, you know, paying, maybe putting some guardrails and definitions around the modern data stack, what does that look like? What are some of the attributes and, and principles there >>Of, of how it should look like or, or how >>It's yeah. What it should be. >>Yeah. Yeah. Well, I think, you know, in, in Theresa mentioned this in, in a previous segment about the data warehouse is not necessarily going to disappear. It just becomes one node, one element of the overall data mesh. And I, I certainly agree with that. So by no means, are we suggesting that, you know, snowflake or Redshift or whatever cloud data warehouse you may be using is going to disappear, but it's, it's not going to become the end all be all. It's not the, the central single source of truth. And I think that's the paradigm shift that needs to occur. And I think it's also worth noting that those who were the early adopters of the modern data stack were primarily digital, native born in the cloud young companies who had the benefit of, of idealism. They had the benefit of it was starting with a clean slate that does not reflect the vast majority of enterprises. >>And even those companies, as they grow up mature out of that ideal state, they go buy a business. Now they've got something on another cloud provider that has a different data stack and they have to deal with that heterogeneity that is just change and change is a part of life. And so I think there is an element here that is almost philosophical. It's like, do you believe in an absolute ideal where I can just fit everything into one place or do I believe in reality? And I think the far more pragmatic approach is really what data mesh represents. So to answer your question directly, I think it's adding, you know, the ability to access data that lives outside of the data warehouse, maybe living in open data formats in a data lake or accessing operational systems as well. Maybe you want to directly access data that lives in an Oracle database or a Mongo database or, or what have you. So creating that flexibility to really Futureproof yourself from the inevitable change that you will, you won't encounter over time. >>So thank you. So there, based on what Justin just said, I, my takeaway there is it's inclusive, whether it's a data Mar data hub, data lake data warehouse, it's a, just a node on the mesh. Okay. I get that. Does that include there on Preem data? O obviously it has to, what are you seeing in terms of the ability to, to take that data mesh concept on Preem? I mean, most implementations I've seen in data mesh, frankly really aren't, you know, adhering to the philosophy. They're maybe, maybe it's data lake and maybe it's using glue. You look at what JPMC is doing. Hello, fresh, a lot of stuff happening on the AWS cloud in that, you know, closed stack, if you will. What's the answer to that Theresa? >>I mean, I, I think it's a killer case for data. Me, the fact that you have valuable data sources, OnPrem, and then yet you still wanna modernize and take the best of cloud cloud is still, like we mentioned, there's a lot of great reasons for it around the economics and the way ability to tap into the innovation that the cloud providers are giving around data and AI architecture. It's an easy button. So the mesh allows you to have the best of both worlds. You can start using the data products on-prem or in the existing systems that are working already. It's meaningful for the business. At the same time, you can modernize the ones that make business sense because it needs better performance. It needs, you know, something that is, is cheaper or, or maybe just tap into better analytics to get better insights, right? So you're gonna be able to stretch and really have the best of both worlds. That, again, going back to Richard's point, that is meaningful by the business. Not everything has to have that one size fits all set a tool. >>Okay. Thank you. So Richard, you know, talking about data as product, wonder if we could give us your perspectives here, what are the advantages of treating data as a product? What, what role do data products have in the modern data stack? We talk about monetizing data. What are your thoughts on data products? >>So for us, one of the most important data products that we've been creating is taking data that is healthcare data across a wide variety of different settings. So information about patients' demographics about their, their treatment, about their medications and so on, and taking that into a standards format that can be utilized by a wide variety of different researchers because misinterpreting that data or having the data not presented in the way that the user is expecting means that you generate the wrong insight. And in any business, that's clearly not a desirable outcome, but when that insight is so critical, as it might be in healthcare or some security settings, you really have to have gone to the trouble of understanding the data, presenting it in a format that everyone can clearly agree on. And then letting people consume in a very structured, managed way, even if that data comes from a variety of different sources in, in, in the first place. And so our data product journey has really begun by standardizing data across a number of different silos through the data mesh. So we can present out both internally and through the right governance externally to, to researchers. >>So that data product through whatever APIs is, is accessible, it's discoverable, but it's obviously gotta be governed as well. You mentioned you, you appropriately provided to internally. Yeah. But also, you know, external folks as well. So the, so you've, you've architected that capability today >>We have, and because the data is standard, it can generate value much more quickly and we can be sure of the security and, and, and value that that's providing because the data product isn't just about formatting the data into the correct tables, it's understanding what it means to redact the data or to remove certain rows from it or to interpret what a date actually means. Is it the start of the contract or the start of the treatment or the date of birth of a patient? These things can be lost in the data storage without having the proper product management around the data to say in a very clear business context, what does this data mean? And what does it mean to process this data for a particular use case? >>Yeah, it makes sense. It's got the context. If the, if the domains own the data, you, you gotta cut through a lot of the, the, the centralized teams, the technical teams that, that data agnostic, they don't really have that context. All right. Let's send Justin, how does Starburst fit into this modern data stack? Bring us home. >>Yeah. So I think for us, it's really providing our customers with, you know, the flexibility to operate and analyze data that lives in a wide variety of different systems. Ultimately giving them that optionality, you know, and optionality provides the ability to reduce costs, store more in a data lake rather than data warehouse. It provides the ability for the fastest time to insight to access the data directly where it lives. And ultimately with this concept of data products that we've now, you know, incorporated into our offering as well, you can really create and, and curate, you know, data as a product to be shared and consumed. So we're trying to help enable the data mesh, you know, model and make that an appropriate compliment to, you know, the, the, the modern data stack that people have today. >>Excellent. Hey, I wanna thank Justin Theresa and Richard for joining us today. You guys are great. I big believers in the, in the data mesh concept, and I think, you know, we're seeing the future of data architecture. So thank you. Now, remember, all these conversations are gonna be available on the cube.net for on-demand viewing. You can also go to starburst.io. They have some great content on the website and they host some really thought provoking interviews and, and, and they have awesome resources, lots of data mesh conversations over there, and really good stuff in, in the resource section. So check that out. Thanks for watching the data doesn't lie or does it made possible by Starburst data? This is Dave Valante for the cube, and we'll see you next time. >>The explosion of data sources has forced organizations to modernize their systems and architecture and come to terms with one size does not fit all for data management today. Your teams are constantly moving and copying data, which requires time management. And in some cases, double paying for compute resources. Instead, what if you could access all your data anywhere using the BI tools and SQL skills your users already have. And what if this also included enterprise security and fast performance with Starburst enterprise, you can provide your data consumers with a single point of secure access to all of your data, no matter where it lives with features like strict, fine grained, access control, end to end data encryption and data masking Starburst meets the security standards of the largest companies. Starburst enterprise can easily be deployed anywhere and managed with insights where data teams holistically view their clusters operation and query execution. So they can reach meaningful business decisions faster, all this with the support of the largest team of Trino experts in the world, delivering fully tested stable releases and available to support you 24 7 to unlock the value in all of your data. You need a solution that easily fits with what you have today and can adapt to your architecture. Tomorrow. Starbust enterprise gives you the fastest path from big data to better decisions, cuz your team can't afford to wait. Trino was created to empower analytics anywhere and Starburst enterprise was created to give you the enterprise grade performance, connectivity, security management, and support your company needs organizations like Zolando Comcast and FINRA rely on Starburst to move their businesses forward. Contact us to get started.

>>We're back with Jess Borgman of Starburst and Richard Jarvis of emus health. Okay. We're gonna get into lie. Number two, and that is this an open source based platform cannot give you the performance and control that you can get with a proprietary system. Is that a lie? Justin, the enterprise data warehouse has been pretty dominant and has evolved and matured. Its stack has mature over the years. Why is it not the default platform for data? >>Yeah, well, I think that's become a lie over time. So I, I think, you know, if we go back 10 or 12 years ago with the advent of the first data lake really around Hudu, that probably was true that you couldn't get the performance that you needed to run fast, interactive, SQL queries in a data lake. Now a lot's changed in 10 or 12 years. I remember in the very early days, people would say, you'll, you'll never get performance because you need to be column. You need to store data in a column format. And then, you know, column formats were introduced to, to data lakes. You have Parque ORC file in aro that were created to ultimately deliver performance out of that. So, okay. We got, you know, largely over the performance hurdle, you know, more recently people will say, well, you don't have the ability to do updates and deletes like a traditional data warehouse. >>And now we've got the creation of new data formats, again like iceberg and Delta and DY that do allow for updates and delete. So I think the data lake has continued to mature. And I remember a, a quote from, you know, Kurt Monash many years ago where he said, you know, it takes six or seven years to build a functional database. I think that's that's right. And now we've had almost a decade go by. So, you know, these technologies have matured to really deliver very, very close to the same level performance and functionality of, of cloud data warehouses. So I think the, the reality is that's become a lie and now we have large giant hyperscale internet companies that, you know, don't have the traditional data warehouse at all. They do all of their analytics in a data lake. So I think we've, we've proven that it's very much possible today. >>Thank you for that. And so Richard, talk about your perspective as a practitioner in terms of what open brings you versus, I mean, the closed is it's open as a moving target. I remember Unix used to be open systems and so it's, it is an evolving, you know, spectrum, but, but from your perspective, what does open give you that you can't get from a proprietary system where you are fearful of in a proprietary system? >>I, I suppose for me open buys us the ability to be unsure about the future, because one thing that's always true about technology is it evolves in a, a direction, slightly different to what people expect. And what you don't want to end up is done is backed itself into a corner that then prevents it from innovating. So if you have chosen the technology and you've stored trillions of records in that technology and suddenly a new way of processing or machine learning comes out, you wanna be able to take advantage and your competitive edge might depend upon it. And so I suppose for us, we acknowledge that we don't have perfect vision of what the future might be. And so by backing open storage technologies, we can apply a number of different technologies to the processing of that data. And that gives us the ability to remain relevant, innovate on our data storage. And we have bought our way out of the, any performance concerns because we can use cloud scale infrastructure to scale up and scale down as we need. And so we don't have the concerns that we don't have enough hardware today to process what we want to do, but want to achieve. We can just scale up when we need it and scale back down. So open source has really allowed us to maintain the being at the cutting edge. >>So Justin, let me play devil's advocate here a little bit, and I've talked to JAK about this and you know, obviously her vision is there's an open source that, that data mesh is open source, an open source tooling, and it's not a proprietary, you know, you're not gonna buy a data mesh. You're gonna build it with, with open source toolings and, and vendors like you are gonna support it, but come back to sort of today, you can get to market with a proprietary solution faster. I'm gonna make that statement. You tell me if it's a lie and then you can say, okay, we support Apache iceberg. We're gonna support open source tooling, take a company like VMware, not really in the data business, but how, the way they embraced Kubernetes and, and you know, every new open source thing that comes along, they say, we do that too. Why can't proprietary systems do that and be as effective? >>Yeah, well, I think at least with the, within the data landscape saying that you can access open data formats like iceberg or, or others is, is a bit dis disingenuous because really what you're selling to your customer is a certain degree of performance, a certain SLA, and you know, those cloud data warehouses that can reach beyond their own proprietary storage drop all the performance that they were able to provide. So it is, it reminds me kind of, of, again, going back 10 or 12 years ago when everybody had a connector to hit and that they thought that was the solution, right? But the reality was, you know, a connector was not the same as running workloads in had back then. And I think, think similarly, you know, being able to connect to an external table that lives in an open data format, you know, you're, you're not going to give it the performance that your customers are accustomed to. And at the end of the day, they're always going to be predisposed. They're always going to be incentivized to get that data ingested into the data warehouse, cuz that's where they have control. And you know, the bottom line is the database industry has really been built around vendor lockin. I mean, from the start, how, how many people love Oracle today, but our customers, nonetheless, I think, you know, lockin is, is, is part of this industry. And I think that's really what we're trying to change with open data formats. >>Well, it's interesting reminded when I, you know, I see the, the gas price, the TSR gas price I, I drive up and then I say, oh, that's the cash price credit card. I gotta pay 20 cents more, but okay. But so the, the argument then, so let me, let me come back to you, Justin. So what's wrong with saying, Hey, we support open data formats, but yeah, you're gonna get better performance if you, if you, you keep it into our closed system, are you saying that long term that's gonna come back and bite you cuz you're gonna end up. You mentioned Oracle, you mentioned Teradata. Yeah. That's by, by implication, you're saying that's where snowflake customers are headed. >>Yeah, absolutely. I think this is a movie that, you know, we've all seen before. At least those of us who've been in the industry long enough to, to see this movie play over a couple times. So I do think that's the future. And I think, you know, I loved what Richard said. I actually wrote it down cause I thought it was amazing quote. He said, it buys us the ability to be unsure of the future. That that pretty much says it all the, the future is unknowable and the reality is using open data formats. You remain interoperable with any technology you want to utilize. If you want to use smart to train a machine learning model and you wanna use Starbust to query be a sequel, that's totally cool. They can both work off the same exact, you know, data, data sets by contrast, if you're, you know, focused on a proprietary model, then you're kind of locked in again to that model. I think the same applies to data, sharing to data products, to a wide variety of, of aspects of the data landscape that a proprietary approach kind of closes you and, and locks you in. >>So I would say this Richard, I'd love to get your thoughts on it. Cause I talked to a lot of Oracle customers, not as many te data customers, but, but a lot of Oracle customers and they, you know, they'll admit yeah, you know, they Jimin some price and the license cost they give, but we do get value out of it. And so my question to you, Richard, is, is do the, let's call it data warehouse systems or the proprietary systems. Are they gonna deliver a greater ROI sooner? And is that in allure of, of that customers, you know, are attracted to, or can open platforms deliver as fast an ROI? >>I think the answer to that is it can depend a bit. It depends on your business's skillset. So we are lucky that we have a number of proprietary teams that work in databases that provide our operational data capability. And we have teams of analytics and big data experts who can work with open data sets and open data formats. And so for those different teams, they can get to an ROI more quickly with different technologies for the business though, we can't do better for our operational data stores than proprietary databases. Today we can back off very tight SLAs to them. We can demonstrate reliability from millions of hours of those databases being run enterprise scale, but for an analytics workload where increasing our business is growing in that direction, we can't do better than open data formats with cloud based data mesh type technologies. And so it's not a simple answer. That one will always be the right answer for our business. We definitely have times when proprietary databases provide a capability that we couldn't easily represent or replicate with open technologies. >>Yeah. Richard, stay with you. You mentioned, you know, you know, some things before that, that strike me, you know, the data brick snowflake, you know, thing is a lot of fun for analysts like me. You've got data bricks coming at it. Richard, you mentioned you have a lot of rockstar, data engineers, data bricks coming at it from a data engineering heritage. You get snowflake coming at it from an analytics heritage. Those two worlds are, are colliding people like P Sanji Mohan said, you know what? I think it's actually harder to play in the data engineering. So I E it's easier to for data engineering world to go into the analytics world versus the reverse, but thinking about up and coming engineers and developers preparing for this future of data engineering and data analytics, how, how should they be thinking about the future? What, what's your advice to those young people? >>So I think I'd probably fall back on general programming skill sets. So the advice that I saw years ago was if you have open source technologies, the pythons and Javas on your CV, you command a 20% pay, hike over people who can only do proprietary programming languages. And I think that's true of data technologies as well. And from a business point of view, that makes sense. I'd rather spend the money that I save on proprietary licenses on better engineers, because they can provide more value to the business that can innovate us beyond our competitors. So I think I would my advice to people who are starting here or trying to build teams to capitalize on data assets is begin with open license, free capabilities, because they're very cheap to experiment with. And they generate a lot of interest from people who want to join you as a business. And you can make them very successful early, early doors with, with your analytics journey. >>It's interesting. Again, analysts like myself, we do a lot of TCO work and have over the last 20 plus years and in the world of Oracle, you know, normally it's the staff, that's the biggest nut in total cost of ownership, not an Oracle. It's the it's the license cost is by far the biggest component in the, in the blame pie. All right, Justin, help us close out this segment. We've been talking about this sort of data mesh open, closed snowflake data bricks. Where does Starburst sort of as this engine for the data lake data lake house, the data warehouse, it fit in this, in this world. >>Yeah. So our view on how the future ultimately unfolds is we think that data lakes will be a natural center of gravity for a lot of the reasons that we described open data formats, lowest total cost of ownership, because you get to choose the cheapest storage available to you. Maybe that's S3 or Azure data lake storage, or Google cloud storage, or maybe it's on-prem object storage that you bought at a, at a really good price. So ultimately storing a lot of data in a data lake makes a lot of sense, but I think what makes our perspective unique is we still don't think you're gonna get everything there either. We think that basically centralization of all your data assets is just an impossible endeavor. And so you wanna be able to access data that lives outside of the lake as well. So we kind of think of the lake as maybe the biggest place by volume in terms of how much data you have, but to, to have comprehensive analytics and to truly understand your business and understand it holistically, you need to be able to go access other data sources as well. And so that's the role that we wanna play is to be a single point of access for our customers, provide the right level of fine grained access control so that the right people have access to the right data and ultimately make it easy to discover and consume via, you know, the creation of data products as well. >>Great. Okay. Thanks guys. Right after this quick break, we're gonna be back to debate whether the cloud data model that we see emerging and the so-called modern data stack is really modern, or is it the same wine new bottle when it comes to data architectures, you're watching the cube, the leader in enterprise and emerging tech coverage.

>>In 2011, early Facebook employee and Cloudera co-founder Jeff Ocker famously said the best minds of my generation are thinking about how to get people to click on ads. And that sucks. Let's face it more than a decade later organizations continue to be frustrated with how difficult it is to get value from data and build a truly agile data driven enterprise. What does that even mean? You ask? Well, it means that everyone in the organization has the data they need when they need it. In a context that's relevant to advance the mission of an organization. Now that could mean cutting costs could mean increasing profits, driving productivity, saving lives, accelerating drug discovery, making better diagnoses, solving, supply chain problems, predicting weather disasters, simplifying processes, and thousands of other examples where data can completely transform people's lives beyond manipulating internet users to behave a certain way. We've heard the prognostications about the possibilities of data before and in fairness we've made progress, but the hard truth is the original promises of master data management, enterprise data, warehouses, data, Mars, data hubs, and yes, even data lakes were broken and left us wanting for more welcome to the data doesn't lie, or does it a series of conversations produced by the cube and made possible by Starburst data. >>I'm your host, Dave Lanta and joining me today are three industry experts. Justin Borgman is this co-founder and CEO of Starburst. Richard Jarvis is the CTO at EMI health and Theresa tongue is cloud first technologist at Accenture. Today we're gonna have a candid discussion that will expose the unfulfilled and yes, broken promises of a data past we'll expose data lies, big lies, little lies, white lies, and hidden truths. And we'll challenge, age old data conventions and bust some data myths. We're debating questions like is the demise of a single source of truth. Inevitable will the data warehouse ever have feature parody with the data lake or vice versa is the so-called modern data stack simply centralization in the cloud, AKA the old guards model in new cloud close. How can organizations rethink their data architectures and regimes to realize the true promises of data can and will and open ecosystem deliver on these promises in our lifetimes, we're spanning much of the Western world today. Richard is in the UK. Teresa is on the west coast and Justin is in Massachusetts with me. I'm in the cube studios about 30 miles outside of Boston folks. Welcome to the program. Thanks for coming on. Thanks for having us. Let's get right into it. You're very welcome. Now here's the first lie. The most effective data architecture is one that is centralized with a team of data specialists serving various lines of business. What do you think Justin? >>Yeah, definitely a lie. My first startup was a company called hit adapt, which was an early SQL engine for IDU that was acquired by Teradata. And when I got to Teradata, of course, Terada is the pioneer of that central enterprise data warehouse model. One of the things that I found fascinating was that not one of their customers had actually lived up to that vision of centralizing all of their data into one place. They all had data silos. They all had data in different systems. They had data on-prem data in the cloud. You know, those companies were acquiring other companies and inheriting their data architecture. So, you know, despite being the industry leader for 40 years, not one of their customers truly had everything in one place. So I think definitely history has proven that to be a lie. >>So Richard, from a practitioner's point of view, you know, what, what are your thoughts? I mean, there, there's a lot of pressure to cut cost, keep things centralized, you know, serve the business as best as possible from that standpoint. What, what is your experience, Joe? >>Yeah, I mean, I think I would echo Justin's experience really that we, as a business have grown up through acquisition, through storing data in different places sometimes to do information governance in different ways to store data in, in a platform that's close to data experts, people who really understand healthcare data from pharmacies or from, from doctors. And so, although if you were starting from a Greenfield site and you were building something brand new, you might be able to centralize all the data and all of the tooling and teams in one place. The reality is that that businesses just don't grow up like that. And, and it's just really impossible to get that academic perfection of, of storing everything in one place. >>Y you know, Theresa, I feel like Sarbanes Oxley kinda saved the data warehouse, you know? Right. But you actually did have to have a single version of the truth for certain financial data, but really for those, some of those other use cases, I, I mentioned, I, I do feel like the industry has kinda let us down. What's your take on this? Where does it make sense to have that sort of centralized approach versus where does it make sense to maybe decentralized? >>I, I think you gotta have centralized governance, right? So from the central team, for things like swans Oxley, for things like security, for certain very core data sets, having a centralized set of roles, responsibilities to really QA, right. To serve as a design authority for your entire data estate, just like you might with security, but how it's implemented has to be distributed. Otherwise you're not gonna be able to scale. Right? So being able to have different parts of the business really make the right data investments for their needs. And then ultimately you're gonna collaborate with your partners. So partners that are not within the company, right. External partners, we're gonna see a lot more data sharing and model creation. And so you're definitely going to be decentralized. >>So, you know, Justin, you guys last, geez, I think it was about a year ago, had a session on, on data mesh. It was a great program. You invited JAK, Dani, of course, she's the creator of the data mesh. And her one of our fundamental premises is that you've got this hyper specialized team that you've gotta go through. And if you want anything, but at the same time, these, these individuals actually become a bottleneck, even though they're some of the most talented people in the organization. So I guess question for you, Richard, how do you deal with that? Do you, do you organize so that there are a few sort of rock stars that, that, you know, build cubes and, and the like, and, and, and, or have you had any success in sort of decentralizing with, you know, your, your constituencies, that data model? >>Yeah. So, so we absolutely have got rockstar, data scientists and data guardians. If you like people who understand what it means to use this data, particularly as the data that we use at emos is very private it's healthcare information. And some of the, the rules and regulations around using the data are very complex and, and strict. So we have to have people who understand the usage of the data, then people who understand how to build models, how to process the data effectively. And you can think of them like consultants to the wider business, because a pharmacist might not understand how to structure a SQL query, but they do understand how they want to process medication information to improve patient lives. And so that becomes a, a consulting type experience from a, a set of rock stars to help a, a more decentralized business who needs to, to understand the data and to generate some valuable output. >>Justin, what do you say to a, to a customer or prospect that says, look, Justin, I'm gonna, I got a centralized team and that's the most cost effective way to serve the business. Otherwise I got, I got duplication. What do you say to that? >>Well, I, I would argue it's probably not the most cost effective and, and the reason being really twofold. I think, first of all, when you are deploying a enterprise data warehouse model, the, the data warehouse itself is very expensive, generally speaking. And so you're putting all of your most valuable data in the hands of one vendor who now has tremendous leverage over you, you know, for many, many years to come, I think that's the story of Oracle or Terra data or other proprietary database systems. But the other aspect I think is that the reality is those central data warehouse teams is as much as they are experts in the technology. They don't necessarily understand the data itself. And this is one of the core tenets of data mash that that jam writes about is this idea of the domain owners actually know the data the best. >>And so by, you know, not only acknowledging that data is generally decentralized and to your earlier point about, so Oxley, maybe saving the data warehouse, I would argue maybe GDPR and data sovereignty will destroy it because data has to be decentralized for, for those laws to be compliant. But I think the reality is, you know, the data mesh model basically says, data's decentralized, and we're gonna turn that into an asset rather than a liability. And we're gonna turn that into an asset by empowering the people that know the data, the best to participate in the process of, you know, curating and creating data products for, for consumption. So I think when you think about it, that way, you're going to get higher quality data and faster time to insight, which is ultimately going to drive more revenue for your business and reduce costs. So I think that that's the way I see the two, the two models comparing and con contrasting. >>So do you think the demise of the data warehouse is inevitable? I mean, I mean, you know, there Theresa you work with a lot of clients, they're not just gonna rip and replace their existing infrastructure. Maybe they're gonna build on top of it, but the, what does that mean? Does that mean the ed w just becomes, you know, less and less valuable over time, or it's maybe just isolated to specific use cases. What's your take on that? >>Listen, I still would love all my data within a data warehouse would love it. Mastered would love it owned by essential team. Right? I think that's still what I would love to have. That's just not the reality, right? The investment to actually migrate and keep that up to date. I would say it's a losing battle. Like we've been trying to do it for a long time. Nobody has the budgets and then data changes, right? There's gonna be a new technology. That's gonna emerge that we're gonna wanna tap into. There's gonna be not enough investment to bring all the legacy, but still very useful systems into that centralized view. So you keep the data warehouse. I think it's a very, very valuable, very high performance tool for what it's there for, but you could have this, you know, new mesh layer that still takes advantage of the things. I mentioned, the data products in the systems that are meaningful today and the data products that actually might span a number of systems. Maybe either those that either source systems, the domains that know it best, or the consumer based systems and products that need to be packaged in a way that be really meaningful for that end user, right? Each of those are useful for a different part of the business and making sure that the mesh actually allows you to lose all of them. >>So, Richard, let me ask you, you take, take Gemma's principles back to those. You got, you know, the domain ownership and, and, and data as product. Okay, great. Sounds good. But it creates what I would argue or two, you know, challenges self-serve infrastructure let's park that for a second. And then in your industry, one of the high, most regulated, most sensitive computational governance, how do you automate and ensure federated governance in that mesh model that Theresa was just talking about? >>Well, it absolutely depends on some of the tooling and processes that you put in place around those tools to be, to centralize the security and the governance of the data. And, and I think, although a data warehouse makes that very simple, cause it's a single tool, it's not impossible with some of the data mesh technologies that are available. And so what we've done at EMI is we have a single security layer that sits on top of our data mesh, which means that no matter which user is accessing, which data source, we go through a well audited well understood security layer. That means that we know exactly who's got access to which data field, which data tables. And then everything that they do is, is audited in a very kind of standard way, regardless of the underlying data storage technology. So for me, although storing the data in one place might not be possible understanding where your source of truth is and securing that in a common way is still a valuable approach and you can do it without having to bring all that data into a single bucket so that it's all in one place. >>And, and so having done that and investing quite heavily in making that possible has paid dividends in terms of giving wider access to the platform and ensuring that only data that's available under GDPR and other regulations is being used by, by the data users. >>Yeah. So Justin mean Democrat, we always talk about data democratization and you know, up until recently, they really haven't been line of sight as to how to get there. But do you have anything to add to this because you're essentially taking, you know, doing analytic queries and with data, that's all dispersed all over the, how are you seeing your customers handle this, this challenge? >>Yeah, I mean, I think data products is a really interesting aspect of the answer to that. It allows you to, again, leverage the data domain owners, people know the data, the best to, to create, you know, data as a product ultimately to be consumed. And we try to represent that in our product as effectively, almost eCommerce, like experience where you go and discover and look for the data products that have been created in your organization. And then you can start to consume them as, as you'd like. And so really trying to build on that notion of, you know, data democratization and self-service, and making it very easy to discover and, and start to use with whatever BI tool you, you may like, or even just running, you know, SQL queries yourself. >>Okay. G guys grab a sip of water. After the short break, we'll be back to debate whether proprietary or open platforms are the best path to the future of data excellence. Keep it right there.

>>Hey, everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner, showcase women in tech. I'm Lisa Martin from the cube. And today we're gonna be looking into the exciting evolution of women in the tech industry. I'm going to be joined by Danielle GShock, the ISP PSA director at AWS. And we have the privilege of speaking with some wicked smart women from Teradata NetApp. JFI a 10th revolution group, company and honeycomb.io. We're gonna look at some of the challenges and biases that women face in the tech industry, especially in leadership roles. We're also gonna be exploring how are these tech companies addressing diversity, equity and inclusion across their organizations? How can we get more young girls into stem earlier in their careers? So many questions. So let's go ahead and get started. This is the AWS partner showcase women in tech. Hey, everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase. This is season one, episode three. And I'm your host, Lisa Martin. I've got two great guests here with me to talk about women in tech. Hillary Ashton joins us the chief product officer at Terry data. And Danielle Greshaw is back with us, the ISV PSA director at AWS ladies. It's great to have you on the program talking through such an important topic, Hillary, let's go ahead and start with you. Give us a little bit of an intro into you, your background, and a little bit about Teradata. >>Yeah, absolutely. So I'm Hillary Ashton. I head up the products organization. So that's our engineering product management office of the CTO team. Um, at Teradata I've been with Terra data for just about three years and really have spent the last several decades. If I can say that in the data and analytics space, um, I spent time, uh, really focused on the value of, of analytics at scale, and I'm super excited to be here at Teradata. I'm also a mom of two teenage boys. And so as we talk about women in tech, I think there's, um, uh, lots of different dimensions and angles of that. Um, at Teradata, we are partnered very deeply with AWS and happy to talk a little bit more about that, um, throughout this discussion as well. >>Excellent. A busy mom of two teen boys. My goodness. I don't know how you do it. Let's now look, Atter data's views of diversity, equity and inclusion. It's a, the, it's a topic that's important to everyone, but give us a snapshot into some of the initiatives that Terra data has there. >>Yeah, I have to say, I am super proud to be working at Teradata. We have gone through, uh, a series of transformations, but I think it starts with culture and we are deeply committed to diversity, equity and inclusion. It's really more than just a statement here. It's just how we live our lives. Um, and we use, uh, data to back that up. Um, in fact, we were named one of the world's most ethical companies for the 13th year in a row. Um, and all of our executive leadership team has taken an oath around D E and I that's available on LinkedIn as well. So, um, in fact, our leadership team reporting into the CEO is just about 50 50, um, men and women, which is the first time I've worked in a company where that has been the case. And I think as individuals, we can probably appreciate what a huge difference that makes in terms of not just being a representative, but truly being on a, on a diverse and equitable, uh, team. And I think it really, uh, improves the behaviors that we can bring, um, to our office. >>There's so much value in that. It's I impressive to see about a 50 50 at the leadership level. That's not something that we see very often. Tell me how you, Hillary, how did you get into tech? Were you an engineering person by computer science, or did you have more of a zigzaggy path to where you are now? >>I'm gonna pick door number two and say more zigzaggy. Um, I started off thinking, um, that I started off as a political science major or a government major. Um, and I was probably destined to go into, um, the law field, but actually took a summer course at Harvard. I did not go to Harvard, but I took a summer course there and learned a lot about multimedia and some programming. And that really set me on a trajectory of how, um, data and analytics can truly provide value and, and outcomes to our customers. Um, and I have been living that life ever since. Um, I graduated from college, so, um, I was very excited and privileged in my early career to, uh, work in a company where I found after my first year that I was managing, um, uh, kids, people who had graduated from Harvard business school and from MIT Sloan school. Um, and that was super crazy, cuz I did not go to either of those schools, but I sort of have always had a natural knack for how do you take technology and, and the really cool things that technology can do, but because I'm not a programmer by training, I'm really focused on the value that I'm able to help, um, organizations really extract value, um, from the technology that we can create, which I think is fantastic. >>I think there's so much value in having a zigzag path into tech. You bring Danielle, you and I have talked about this many times you bring such breadth and such a wide perspective. That really is such a value. Add to teams. Danielle, talk to us from AWS's perspective about what can be done to encourage more young women to get and under and underrepresented groups as well, to get into stem and stay. >>Yeah, and this is definitely a challenge as we're trying to grow our organization and kind of shift the numbers. And the reality is, especially with the more senior folks in our organization, unless you bring folks with a zigzag path, the likelihood is you won't be able to change the numbers that you have. Um, but for me, it's really been about, uh, looking at that, uh, the folks who are just graduating college, maybe in other roles where they are adjacent to technology and to try to spark their interest and show that yes, they can do it because oftentimes it's really about believing in themselves and, and realizing that we need folks with all sorts of different perspectives to kind of come in, to be able to help really, um, provide both products and services and solutions for all types of people inside of technology, which requires all sorts of perspectives. >>Yeah, the diverse perspectives. There's so much value and there's a lot of data that demonstrates how much value revenue impact organizations can make by having diversity, especially at the leadership level. Hillary, let's go back to you. We talked about your career path. You talked about some of the importance of the focus on de and I at Tarana, but what are, what do you think can be done to encourage, to sorry, to recruit more young women and under groups into tech, any, any carrot there that you think are really important that we need to be dangling more of? >>Yeah, absolutely. And I'll build on what Danielle just said. I think the, um, bringing in diverse understandings, um, of, of customer outcomes, I mean, I, the we've really moved from technology for technology's sake and I know AWS and entirety to have had a lot of conversations on how do we drive customer outcomes that are differentiated in the market and really being customer centric and technology is wonderful. You can do wonderful things with it. You can do not so wonderful things with it as well, but unless you're really focused on the outcomes and what customers are seeking, um, technology is not hugely valuable. And so I think bringing in people who understand, um, voice of customer who understand those outcomes, and those are not necessarily the, the, the folks who are PhD in mathematics or statistics, um, those can be people who understand a day in the life of a data scientist or a day in the life of a citizen data scientist. And so really working to bridge the high impact technology with the practical kind of usability, usefulness of data and analytics in our cases, I think is something that we need more of in tech and sort of demystifying tech and freeing technology so that everybody can use it and having a really wide range of people who understand not just the bits and bites and, and how to program, but also the value in outcomes that technology through data and analytics can drive. >>Yeah. You know, we often talk about the hard skills, but this, their soft skills are equally, if not more important that even just being curious, being willing to ask questions, being not afraid to be vulnerable, being able to show those sides of your personality. I think those are important for, for young women and underrepresented groups to understand that those are just as important as some of the harder technical skills that can be taught. >>That's right. >>What do you think about from a bias perspective, Hillary, what have you seen in the tech industry and how do you think we can leverage culture as you talked about to help dial down some of the biases that are going on? >>Yeah. I mean, I think first of all, and, and there's some interesting data out there that says that 90% of the population, which includes a lot of women have some inherent bias in their day, day behaviors when it comes to to women in particular. But I'm sure that that is true across all kinds of, of, um, diverse and underrepresented folks in, in the world. And so I think acknowledging that we have bias and actually really learning how, what that can look like, how that can show up. We might be sitting here and thinking, oh, of course I don't have any bias. And then you realize that, um, as you, as you learn more about, um, different types of bias, that actually you do need to kind of, um, account for that and change behaviors. And so I think learning is sort of a fundamental, um, uh, grounding for all of us to really know what bias looks like, know how it shows up in each of us. >>Um, if we're leaders know how it shows up in our teams and make sure that we are constantly getting better, we're, we're not gonna be perfect anytime soon. But I think being on a path to improvement to overcoming bias, um, is really, is really critical. And part of that is really starting the dialogue, having the conversations, holding ourselves and each other accountable, um, when things aren't going in, in a, in a Coptic way and being able to talk openly about that, that felt, um, like maybe there was some bias in that interaction and how do we, um, how do we make good on that? How do we change our, our behavior? Fundamentally of course, data and analytics can have some bias in it as well. And so I think as we look at the, the technology aspect of bias, um, looking at at ethical AI, I think is a, a really important, uh, additional area. And I'm sure we could spend another 20 minutes talking about that, but I, I would be remiss if I didn't talk more about sort of the bias, um, and the over the opportunity to overcome bias in data and analytics as well. >>Yeah. The opportunity to overcome it is definitely there you bring up a couple of really good points, Hillary. It, it starts with awareness. We need to be aware that there are inherent biases in data in thought. And also to your other point, hold people accountable ourselves, our teammates, that's critical to being able to, to dial that back down, Daniel, I wanna get your perspective on, on your view of women in leadership roles. Do you think that we have good representation or we still have work to do in there? >>I definitely think in both technical and product roles, we definitely have some work to do. And, you know, when I think about, um, our partnership with Teradata, part of the reason why it's so important is, you know, Teradata solution is really the brains of a lot of companies. Um, you know, the what, how, what they differentiate on how they figure out insights into their business. And it's, it's all about the product itself and the data and the same is true at AWS. And, you know, we really could do some work to have some more women in these technical roles, as well as in the product, shaping the products. Uh, just for all the reasons that we just kind of talked about over the last 10 minutes, um, in order to, you know, move bias out of our, um, out of our solutions and also to just build better products and have, uh, better, you know, outcomes for customers. So I think there's a bit of work to do still. >>I agree. There's definitely a bit of work to do, and it's all about delivering those better outcomes for customers at the end of the day, we need to figure out what the right ways are of doing that and working together in a community. Um, we've had obviously a lot had changed in the last couple of years, Hillary, what's your, what have you seen in terms of the impact that the pandemic has had on this status of women in tech? Has it been a pro is silver lining the opposite? What are you seeing? >>Yeah, I mean, certainly there's data out there that tells us factually that it has been, um, very difficult for women during COVID 19. Um, women have, uh, dropped out of the workforce for a wide range of, of reasons. Um, and, and that I think is going to set us back all of us, the, the Royal us or the Royal we back, um, years and years. Um, and, and it's very unfortunate because I think we we're at a time when we're making great progress and now to see COVID, um, setting us back in, in such a powerful way. I think there's work to be done to understand how do we bring people back into the workforce. Um, how do we do that? Understanding work life balance, better understanding virtual and remote, working better. I think in the technology sector, um, we've really embraced, um, hybrid virtual work and are, are empowering people to bring their whole selves to work. >>And I think if anything, these, these zoom calls have, um, both for the men and the women on my team. In fact, I would say much more. So for the men on my team, I'm seeing, I was seeing more kids in the background, more kind of split childcare duties, more ability to start talking about, um, other responsibilities that maybe they had, uh, especially in the early days of COVID where maybe daycares were shut down. And, um, you had, you know, maybe a parent was sick. And so we saw quite a lot of, um, people bringing their whole selves to the office, which I think was, was really wonderful. Um, uh, even our CEO saw some of that. And I think, um, that that really changes the dialogue, right? It changes it to maybe scheduling meetings at a time when, um, people can do it after daycare drop off. >>Um, and really allowing that both for men and for women makes it better for, for women overall. So I would like to think that this hybrid working, um, environment and that this, um, uh, whole view into somebody's life that COVID has really provided for probably for white collar workers, if I'm being honest for, um, people who are in a, at a better point of privilege, they don't necessarily have to go into the office every day. I would like to think that tech can lead the way in, um, you know, coming out of the, the old COVID. I don't know if we have a new COVID coming, but the old COVID and really leading the way for women and for people, um, to transform how we do work, um, leveraging data and analytics, but also, um, overcoming some of the, the disparities that exist for women in particular in the workforce. >>Yeah, I think there's, there's like we say, there's a lot of opportunity there and I like your point of hopefully tech can be that guiding light that shows us this can be done. We're all humans at the end of the day. And ultimately if we're able to have some sort of work life balance, everything benefits, our work or more productive, higher performing teams impacts customers, right? There's so much value that can be gleaned from, from that hybrid model and embracing for humans. We need to be able to, to work when we can, we've learned that you don't have to be, you know, in an office 24, 7 commuting, crazy hours flying all around the world. We can get a lot of things done in a ways that fit people's lives rather than taking command over it. Wanna get your advice, Hillary, if you were to talk to your younger self, what would be some of the key pieces of advice you would say? And Danielle and I have talked about this before, and sometimes we, we would both agree on like, ask more questions. Don't be afraid to raise your hand, but what advice would you give your younger self and that younger generation in terms of being inspired to get into tech >>Oh, inspired and being in tech? You know, I think looking at technology as, in some ways, I feel like we do a disservice to, um, inclusion when we talk about stem, cuz I think stem can be kind of daunting. It can be a little scary for people for younger people. When I, when I go and talk to folks at schools, I think stem is like, oh, all the super smart kids are over there. They're all like maybe they're all men. And so, um, it's, it's a little, uh, intimidating. Um, and stem is actually, you know, especially for, um, people joining the workforce today. It's actually how you've been living your life since you were born. I mean, you know, stem inside and out because you walk around with a phone and you know how to get your internet working and like that is technology right. >>Fundamentally. And so demystifying stem as something that is around how we, um, actually make our, our lives useful and, and, and how we can change outcomes. Um, through technology I think is maybe a different lens to put on it. So, and there's absolutely for, for hard sciences, there's absolutely a, a great place in the world for folks who wanna pursue that and men and women can do that. So I, I don't want to be, um, uh, setting the wrong expectations, but I, I think stem is, is very holistic in, um, in the change that's happening globally for us today across economies, across global warming, across all kinds of impactful issues. And so I think everybody who's interested in, in some of that world change can participate in stem. It just may be through a different, through a different lens than how we classically talk about stem. >>So I think there's great opportunity to demystify stem. I think also, um, what I would tell my younger self is choose your bosses wisely. And that sounds really funny. That sounds like inside out almost, but I think choose the person that you're gonna work for in your first five to seven years. And it might be more than one person, but be, be selective, maybe be a little less selective about the exact company or the exact title. I think picking somebody that, you know, we talk about mentors and we talk about sponsors and those are important. Um, but the person you're gonna spend in your early career, a lot of your day with a lot, who's gonna influence a lot of the outcomes for you. That is the person that you, I think want to be more selective about, um, because that person can set you up for success and give you opportunities and set you on course to be, um, a standout or that person can hold you back. >>And that person can put you in the corner and not invite you to the meetings and not give you those opportunities. And so we're in an economy today where you actually can, um, be a little bit picky about who you go and work for. And I would encourage my younger self. I actually, I just lucked out actually, but I think that, um, my first boss really set me, um, up for success, gave me a lot of feedback and coaching. Um, and some of it was really hard to hear, but it really set me up for, for, um, the, the path that I've been on ever since. So it, that would be my advice. >>I love that advice. I it's brilliant. I didn't think it choose your bosses wisely. Isn't something that we primarily think about. I think a lot of people think about the big name companies that they wanna go after and put on a resume, but you bring up a great point. And Danielle and I have talked about this with other guests about mentors and sponsors. I think that is brilliant advice and also more work to do to demystify stem. But luckily we have great family leaders like the two of you helping us to do that. Ladies, I wanna thank you so much for joining me on the program today and talking through what you're seeing in de and I, what your companies are doing and the opportunities that we have to move the needle. Appreciate your time. >>Thank you so much. Great to see you, Danielle. Thank you Lisa, to see you. >>My pleasure for my guests. I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the AWS partner showcase season one, episode three. Hey everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase. This is season one, episode three, with a focus on women in tech. I'm your host, Lisa Martin. I've got two guests here with me, Sue Peretti, the EVP of global AWS strategic alliances at Jefferson Frank, a 10th revolution group company, and Danielle brushoff. One of our cube alumni joins us ISV PSA director, ladies. It's great to have you on the program talking about a, a topic that is near and dear to my heart at women in tech. >>Thank you, Lisa. >>So let's go ahead and start with you. Give the audience an understanding of Jefferson Frank, what does the company do and about the partnership with AWS? >>Sure. Um, so let's just start, uh, Jefferson Frank is a 10th revolution group company. And if you look at it, it's really talent as a service. So Jefferson Frank provides talent solutions all over the world for AWS clients, partners and users, et cetera. And we have a sister company called revelent, which is a talent creation company within the AWS ecosystem. So we create talent and put it out in the ecosystem. Usually underrepresented groups over half of them are women. And then we also have, uh, a company called rubra, which is a delivery model around AWS technology. So all three companies fall under the 10th revolution group organization. >>Got it. Danielle, talk to me a little bit about from AWS's perspective and the focus on hiring more women in technology and about the partnership. >>Yes. I mean, this has definitely been a focus ever since I joined eight years ago, but also just especially in the last few years we've grown exponentially and our customer base has changed. You know, we wanna have, uh, an organization interacting with them that reflects our customers, right. And, uh, we know that we need to keep pace with that even with our growth. And so we've very much focused on early career talent, um, bringing more women and underrepresented minorities into the organization, sponsoring those folks, promoting them, uh, giving them paths to growth, to grow inside of the organization. I'm an example of that. Of course I benefit benefited from it, but also I try to bring that into my organization as well. And it's super important. >>Tell me a little bit about how you benefited from that, Danielle. >>Um, I just think that, um, you know, I I've been able to get, you know, a seat at the table. I think that, um, I feel as though I have folks supporting me, uh, very deeply and wanna see me succeed. And also they put me forth as, um, you know, a, represent a representative, uh, to bring more women into the organization as well. And I think, um, they give me a platform, uh, in order to do that, um, like this, um, but also many other, uh, spots as well. Um, and I'm happy to do it because I feel that, you know, if you always wanna feel that you're making a difference in your job, and that is definitely a place where I get that time and space in order to be that representative to, um, bring more, more women into benefiting from having careers in technology, which there's a lot of value there, >>A lot of value. Absolutely. So back over to you, what are some of the trends that you are seeing from a gender diversity perspective in tech? We know the, the numbers of women in technical positions, uh, right. There's so much data out there that shows when girls start dropping up, but what are some of the trends that you are seeing? >>So it's, that's a really interesting question. And, and Lisa, I had a whole bunch of data points that I wanted to share with you, but just two weeks ago, uh, I was in San Francisco with AWS at the, at the summit. And we were talking about this. We were talking about how we can collectively together attract more women, not only to, uh, AWS, not only to technology, but to the AWS ecosystem in particular. And it was fascinating because I was talking about, uh, the challenges that women have and how hard to believe, but about 5% of women who were in the ecosystem have left in the past few years, which was really, really, uh, something that shocked everyone when we, when we were talking about it, because all of the things that we've been asking for, for instance, uh, working from home, um, better pay, uh, more flexibility, uh, better maternity leave seems like those things are happening. >>So we're getting what we want, but people are leaving. And it seemed like the feedback that we got was that a lot of women still felt very underrepresented. The number one thing was that they, they couldn't be, you can't be what you can't see. So because they, we feel collectively women, uh, people who identify as women just don't see enough women in leadership, they don't see enough mentors. Um, I think I've had great mentors, but, but just not enough. I'm lucky enough to have a pres a president of our company, the president of our company, Zoe Morris is a woman and she does lead by example. So I'm very lucky for that. And Jefferson, Frank really quickly, we put out a hiring a salary and hiring guide a career and hiring guide every year and the data points. And that's about 65 pages long. No one else does it. Uh, it gives an abundance of information around, uh, everything about the AWS ecosystem that a hiring manager might need to know. But there is what, what I thought was really unbelievable was that only 7% of the people that responded to it were women. So my goal, uh, being that we have such a very big global platform is to get more women to respond to that survey so we can get as much information and take action. So >>Absolutely 7%. So a long way to go there. Danielle, talk to me about AWS's focus on women in tech. I was watching, um, Sue, I saw that you shared on LinkedIn, the Ted talk that the CEO and founder of girls and co did. And one of the things that she said was that there was a, a survey that HP did some years back that showed that, um, 60%, that, that men will apply for jobs if they only meet 60% of the list of requirements. Whereas with females, it's far, far less, we've all been in that imposter syndrome, um, conundrum before. But Danielle, talk to us about AWS, a specific focus here to get these numbers up. >>I think it speaks to what Susan was talking about, how, you know, I think we're approaching it top and bottom, right? We're looking out at what are the, who are the women who are currently in technical positions and how can we make AWS an attractive place for them to work? And that's all a lot of the changes that we've had around maternity leave and, and those types of things, but then also, um, more flexible working, uh, can, you know, uh, arrangements, but then also, um, early, how can we actually impact early, um, career women and actually women who are still in school. Um, and our training and certification team is doing amazing things to get, um, more girls exposed to AWS, to technology, um, and make it a less intimidating place and have them look at employees from AWS and say like, oh, I can see myself in those people. >>Um, and kind of actually growing the viable pool of candidates. I think, you know, we're, we're limited with the viable pool of candidates, um, when you're talking about mid to late career. Um, but how can we, you know, help retrain women who are coming back into the workplace after, you know, having a child and how can we help with military women who want to, uh, or underrepresented minorities who wanna move into AWS, we have a great military program, but then also just that early high school, uh, career, you know, getting them in, in that trajectory. >>Sue, is that something that Jefferson Frank is also able to help with is, you know, getting those younger girls before they start to feel there's something wrong with me. I don't get this. Talk to us about how Jefferson Frank can help really drive up that in those younger girls. >>Uh, let me tell you one other thing to refer back to that summit that we did, uh, we had breakout sessions and that was one of the topics. What can cuz that's the goal, right? To make sure that, that there are ways to attract them. That's the goal? So some of the things that we talked about was mentoring programs, uh, from a very young age, some people said high school, but then we said even earlier, goes back to you. Can't be what you can't see. So, uh, getting mentoring programs, uh, established, uh, we also talked about some of the great ideas was being careful of how we speak to women using the right language to attract them. And some, there was a teachable moment for, for me there actually, it was really wonderful because, um, an African American woman said to me, Sue and I, I was talking about how you can't be what you can't see. >>And what she said was Sue, it's really different. Um, for me as an African American woman, uh, or she identified, uh, as nonbinary, but she was relating to African American women. She said, your white woman, your journey was very different than my journey. And I thought, this is how we're going to learn. I wasn't offended by her calling me out at all. It was a teachable moment. And I thought I understood that, but those are the things that we need to educate people on those, those moments where we think we're, we're saying and doing the right thing, but we really need to get that bias out there. So here at Jefferson, Frank, we're, we're trying really hard to get that careers and hiring guide out there. It's on our website to get more women, uh, to talk to it, but to make suggestions in partnership with AWS around how we can do this mentoring, we have a mentor me program. We go around the country and do things like this. We, we try to get the education out there in partnership with AWS. Uh, we have a, a women's group, a women's leadership group, uh, so much that, that we do, and we try to do it in partnership with AWS. >>Danielle, can you comment on the impact that AWS has made so far, um, regarding some of the trends and, and gender diversity that Sue was talking about? What's the impact that's been made so far with this partnership? >>Well, I mean, I think just being able to get more of the data and have awareness of leaders, uh, on how <laugh>, you know, it used to be a, a couple years back, I would feel like sometimes the, um, uh, solving to bring more women into the organization was kind of something that folks thought, oh, this is Danielle is gonna solve this. You know? And I think a lot of folks now realize, oh, this is something that we all need to solve for. And a lot of my colleagues who maybe a couple years ago, didn't have any awareness or didn't even have the tools to do what they needed to do in order to improve the statistics on their, or in their organizations. Now actually have those tools and are able to kind of work with, um, work with companies like Susan's work with Jefferson Frank in order to actually get the data and actually make good decisions and feel as though, you know, they, they often, these are not lived experiences for these folks, so they don't know what they don't know. And by providing data and providing awareness and providing tooling and then setting goals, I think all of those things have really turned, uh, things around in a very positive way. >>And so you bring up a great point about from a diversity perspective, what is Jefferson Frank doing to, to get those data points up, to get more women of, of all well, really underrepresented minorities to, to be able to provide that feedback so that you can, can have the data and gleamy insights from it to help companies like AWS on their strategic objectives. >>Right? So as I, when I go back to that higher that, uh, careers in hiring guide, that is my focus today, really because the more data that we have, I mean, the, and the data takes, uh, you know, we need people to participate in order to, to accurately, uh, get a hold of that data. So that's why we're asking, uh, we're taking the initiative to really expand our focus. We are a global organization with a very, very massive database all over the world, but if people don't take action, then we can't get the right. The, the, the data will not be as accurate as we'd like it to be. Therefore take better action. So what we're doing is we're asking people all over the, all over the world to participate on our website, Jefferson frank.com, the se the high, uh, in the survey. So we can learn as much as we can. >>7% is such a, you know, Danielle and I we're, we've got to partner on this just to sort of get that message out there, get more data so we can execute, uh, some of the other things that we're doing. We're, we're partnering in. As I mentioned, more of these events, uh, we're, we're doing around the summits, we're gonna be having more ed and I events and collecting more information from women. Um, like I said, internally, we do practice what we preach and we have our own programs that are, that are out there that are within our own company where the women who are talking to candidates and clients every single day are trying to get that message out there. So if I'm speaking to a client or one of our internal people are speaking to a client or a candidate, they're telling them, listen, you know, we really are trying to get these numbers up. >>We wanna attract as many people as we can. Would you mind going to this, uh, hiring guide and offering your own information? So we've gotta get that 7% up. We've gotta keep talking. We've gotta keep, uh, getting programs out there. One other thing I wanted to Danielle's point, she mentioned, uh, women in leadership, the number that we gathered was only 9% of women in leadership within the AWS ecosystem. We've gotta get that number up, uh, as well because, um, you know, I know for me, when I see people like Danielle or, or her peers, it inspires me. And I feel like, you know, I just wanna give back, make sure I send the elevator back to the first floor and bring more women in to this amazing ecosystem. >>Absolutely. That's not that metaphor I do too, but we, but to your point to get that those numbers up, not just at AWS, but everywhere else we need, it's a help me help use situation. So ladies underrepresented minorities, if you're watching go to the Jefferson Frank website, take the survey, help provide the data so that the woman here that are doing this amazing work, have it to help make decisions and have more of females and leadership roles or underrepresented minorities. So we can be what we can see. Ladies, thank you so much for joining me today and sharing what you guys are doing together to partner on this important. Cause >>Thank you for having me, Leah, Lisa, >>Thank you. My pleasure for my guests. I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the cubes coverage of the AWS partner showcase. Thanks for your time. Hey everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase season one, episode three women in tech. I'm your host, Lisa Martin. We've got two female rock stars here with me next. Stephanie Curry joins us the worldwide head of sales and go to market strategy for AWS at NetApp and Danielle GShock is back one of our QM ISV PSA director at AWS. Looking forward to a great conversation, ladies, about a great topic, Stephanie, let's go ahead and start with you. Give us an overview of your story, how you got into tech and what inspired you. >>Thanks so much, Lisa and Danielle. It's great to be on this show with you. Um, thank you for that. Uh, my name's Stephanie cur, as Lisa mentioned, I'm the worldwide head of sales for, uh, AWS at NetApp and run a global team of sales people that sell all things AWS, um, going back 25 years now, uh, when I first started my career in tech, it was kind of by accident. Um, I come from a different background. I have a business background and a technical background from school, um, but had been in a different career and I had an opportunity to try something new. Um, I had an ally really that reached out to me and said, Hey, you'd be great for this role. And I thought, I'd take a chance. I was curious. Um, and, uh, it, it turned out to be a 25 year career, um, that I'm really, really excited about and, and, um, really thankful for that person, for introducing me to the, to the industry >>25 years in counting. I'm sure Danielle, we've talked about your background before. So what I wanna focus on with you is the importance of diversity for high performance. I know what a machine AWS is, and Stephanie'll come back to you with the same question, but talk about that, Danielle, from your perspective, that importance, um, for diversity to drive the performance. >>Yeah. Yeah. I truly believe that, you know, in order to have high performing teams, that you have to have people from all different types of backgrounds and experiences. And we do find that oftentimes being, you know, field facing, if we're not reflecting our customers and connecting with them deeply, um, on, on the levels that they're at, we, we end up missing them. And so for us, it's very important to bring people of lots of different technical backgrounds experiences. And of course, both men, women, and underrepresented minorities and put that forth to our customers, um, in order to make that connection and to end up with better outcomes. So >>Definitely it's all about outcomes, Stephanie, your perspective and NetApp's perspective on diversity for creating highly performant teams and organizations. >>I really aligned with Danielle on the comment she made. And in addition to that, you know, just from building teams in my, um, career know, we've had three times as many women on my team since we started a year ago and our results are really showing in that as well. Um, we find the teams are stronger, they're more collaborative and to Danielle's point really reflective, not only our partners, but our customers themselves. So this really creates connections, which are really, really important to scale our businesses and, and really, uh, meet the customer where they're at as well. So huge proponent of that ourselves, and really finding that we have to be intentional in our hiring and intentional in how we attract diversity to our teams. >>So Stephanie let's stay with you. So a three X increase in women on the team in a year, especially the kind of last year that we've had is really incredible. I, I like your, I, your thoughts on there needs to be a, there needs to be focus and, and thought in how teams are hired. Let's talk about attracting and retaining those women now, especially in sales roles, we all know the number, the percentages of women in technical roles, but what are some of the things that, that you do Stephanie, that NetApp does to attract and retain women in those sales roles? >>The, the attracting part's really interesting. And we find that, you know, you, you read the stats and I'd say in my experience, they're also true in the fact that, um, a lot of women would look at a job description and say, I can't do a hundred percent of that, that, so I'm not even going to apply with the women that we've attracted to our team. We've actually intentionally reached out and targeted those people in a good way, um, to say, Hey, we think you've got what it takes. Some of the feedback I've got from those women are, gosh, I didn't think I could ever get this role. I didn't think I had the skills to do that. And they've been hired and they are doing a phenomenal job. In addition to that, I think a lot of the feedback I've got from these hires are, Hey, it's an aggressive sales is aggressive. Sales is competitive. It's not an environment that I think I can be successful in. And what we're showing them is bring those softer skills around collaboration, around connection, around building teams. And they do, they do bring a lot of that to the team. Then they see others like them there and they know they can be successful cuz they see others like them on the team, >>The whole concept of we can't be what we can't see, but we can be what we can't see is so important. You said a couple things, Stephanie, that really stuck with me. And one of them was an interview on the Cub I was doing, I think a couple weeks ago, um, about women in tech. And the stat that we talked about was that women will apply will not apply for a job unless they meet 100% of the skills and the requirements that it's listed, but men will, if they only meet 60. And I, that just shocked me that I thought, you know, I, I can understand that imposter syndrome is real. It's a huge challenge, but the softer skills, as you mentioned, especially in the last two years, plus the ability to communicate, the ability to collaborate are incredibly important to, to drive that performance of any team of any business. >>Absolutely. >>Danielle, talk to me about your perspective and AWS as well for attracting and retaining talent. And, and, and particularly in some of those challenging roles like sales that as Stephanie said, can be known as aggressive. >>Yeah, for sure. I mean, my team is focused on the technical aspect of the field and we definitely have an uphill battle for sure. Um, two things we are focused on first and foremost is looking at early career women and that how we, how can we bring them into this role, whether in they're in support functions, uh, cl like answering the phone for support calls, et cetera, and how, how can we bring them into this organization, which is a bit more strategic, more proactive. Um, and then the other thing that as far as retention goes, you know, sometimes there will be women who they're on a team and there are no other women on that team. And, and for me, it's about building community inside of AWS and being part of, you know, we have women on solution architecture organizations. We have, uh, you know, I just personally connect people as well and to like, oh, you should meet this person. Oh, you should talk to that person. Because again, sometimes they can't see someone on their team like them and they just need to feel anchored, especially as we've all been, you know, kind of stuck at home, um, during the pandemic, just being able to make those connections with women like them has been super important and just being a, a long tenured Amazonian. Um, that's definitely one thing I'm able to, to bring to the table as well. >>That's so important and impactful and spreads across organizations in a good way. Daniel let's stick with you. Let's talk about some of the allies that you've had sponsors, mentors that have really made a difference. And I said that in past tense, but I also mean in present tense, who are some of those folks now that really inspire you? >>Yeah. I mean, I definitely would say that one of my mentors and someone who, uh, ha has been a sponsor of my career has, uh, Matt YK, who is one of our control tower GMs. He has really sponsored my career and definitely been a supporter of mine and pushed me in positive ways, which has been super helpful. And then other of my business partners, you know, Sabina Joseph, who's a cube alum as well. She definitely has been, was a fabulous partner to work with. Um, and you know, between the two of us for a period of time, we definitely felt like we could, you know, conquer the world. It's very great to go in with a, with another strong woman, um, you know, and, and get things done, um, inside of an organization like AWS. >>Absolutely. And S I've, I've agreed here several times. So Stephanie, same question for you. You talked a little bit about your kind of, one of your, uh, original early allies in the tech industry, but talk to me about allies sponsors, mentors who have, and continue to make a difference in your life. >>Yeah. And, you know, I think it's a great differentiation as well, right? Because I think that mentors teach us sponsors show us the way and allies make room for us at the table. And that is really, really key difference. I think also as women leaders, we need to make room for others at the table too, and not forget those softer skills that we bring to the table. Some of the things that Danielle mentioned as well about making those connections for others, right. And making room for them at the table. Um, some of my allies, a lot of them are men. Brian ABI was my first mentor. Uh, he actually is in the distribution, was in distribution, uh, with advent tech data no longer there. Um, Corey Hutchinson, who's now at Hashi Corp. He's also another ally of mine and remains an ally of mine, even though we're not at the same company any longer. Um, so a lot of these people transcend careers and transcend, um, um, different positions that I've held as well and make room for us. And I think that's just really critical when we're looking for allies and when allies are looking for us, >>I love how you described allies, mentors and sponsors Stephanie. And the difference. I didn't understand the difference between a mentor and a sponsor until a couple of years ago. Do you talk with some of those younger females on your team so that when they come into the organization and maybe they're fresh outta college, or maybe they've transitioned into tech so that they can also learn from you and understand the importance and the difference between the allies and the sponsors and the mentors? >>Absolutely. And I think that's really interesting because I do take, uh, an extra, uh, approach an extra time to really reach out to the women that have joined the team. One. I wanna make sure they stay right. I don't want them feeling, Hey, I'm alone here and I need to, I need to go do something else. Um, and they are located around the world, on my team. They're also different age groups, so early in career, as well as more senior people and really reaching out, making sure they know that I'm there. But also as Danielle had mentioned, connecting them to other people in the community that they can reach out to for those same opportunities and making room for them >>Make room at the table. It's so important. And it can, you never know what a massive difference and impact you can make on someone's life. And I, and I bet there's probably a lot of mentors and sponsors and allies of mine that would be surprised to know, uh, the massive influence they've had Daniel back over. Let's talk about some of the techniques that you employ, that AWS employees to make the work environment, a great place for women to really thrive and, and be retained as Stephanie was saying. Of course that's so important. >>Yeah. I mean, definitely I think that the community building, as well as we have a bit more programmatic mentorship, um, we're trying to get to the point of having a more programmatic sponsorship as well. Um, but I think just making sure that, um, you know, both everything from, uh, recruit to onboard to ever boarding that, uh, they they're the women who come into the organization, whether it's they're coming in on the software engineering side or the field side or the sales side that they feel as that they have someone, uh, working with them to help them drive their career. Those are the key things that were, I think from an organizational perspective are happening across the board. Um, for me personally, when I run my organization, I'm really trying to make sure that people feel that they can come to me at any time open door policy, make sure that they're surfacing any times in which they are feeling excluded or anything like that, any challenges, whether it be with a customer, a partner or with a colleague. Um, and then also of course, just making sure that I'm being a good sponsor, uh, to, to people on my team. Um, that is key. You can talk about it, but you have to start with yourself as well. >>That's a great point. You you've got to, to start with yourself and really reflect on that. Mm-hmm <affirmative> and look, am I, am I embodying what it is that I need? And not that I know they need that focused, thoughtful intention on that is so importants, let's talk about some of the techniques that you use that NetApp uses to make the work environment a great place for those women are marginalized, um, communities to really thrive. >>Yeah. And I appreciate it and much like Danielle, uh, and much like AWS, we have some of those more structured programs, right around sponsorship and around mentorship. Um, probably some growth there, opportunities for allies, because I think that's more of a newer concept in really an informal structure around the allies, but something that we're growing into at NetApp, um, on my team personally, I think, um, leading by example's really key. And unfortunately, a lot of the, um, life stuffs still lands on the women, whether we like it or not. Uh, I have a very, uh, active husband in our household, but I still carry when it push comes to shove it's on me. Um, and I wanna make sure that my team knows it's okay to take some time and do the things you need to do with your family. Um, I'm I show up as myself authentically and I encourage them to do the same. >>So it's okay to say, Hey, I need to take a personal day. I need to focus on some stuff that's happening in my personal life this week now, obviously to make sure your job's covered, but just allowing some of that softer vulnerability to come into the team as well, so that others, um, men and women can feel they can do the same thing. And that it's okay to say, I need to balance my life and I need to do some other things alongside. Um, so it's the formal programs, making sure people have awareness on them. Um, I think it's also softly calling people out on biases and saying, Hey, I'm not sure if you know, this landed that way, but I just wanted to make you aware. And usually the feedback is, oh my gosh, I didn't know. And could you coach me on something that I could do better next time? So all of this is driven through our NetApp formal programs, but then it's also how you manifest it on the teams that we're leading. >>Absolutely. And sometimes having that mirror to reflect into can be really eye-opening and, and allow you to, to see things in a completely different light, which is great. Um, you both talked about, um, kind of being what you, uh, can see, and, and I know both companies are upset customer obsessed in a good way. Talk to me a little bit, Danielle, go back over to you about the AWS NetApp partnership. Um, some of that maybe alignment on, on performance on obviously you guys are very well aligned, uh, in terms of that, but also it sounds like you're quite aligned on diversity and inclusion. >>Well, we definitely do. We have the best partnerships with companies in which we have these value alignments. So I think that is a positive thing, of course, but just from a, from a partnership perspective, you know, from my five now plus years of being a part of the APN, this is, you know, one of the most significant years with our launch of FSX for NetApp. Um, with that, uh, key key service, which we're making available natively on AWS. I, I can't think of a better Testament to the, to the, um, partnership than that. And that's doing incredibly well and it really resonates with our customers. And of course it started with customers and their need for NetApp. Uh, so, you know, that is a reflection, I think, of the success that we're having together. >>And Stephanie talk to, uh, about the partnership from your perspective, NetApp, AWS, what you guys are doing together, cultural alignment, but also your alignment on really bringing diversity into drive performance. >>Yeah, I think it's a, a great question. And I have to say it's just been a phenomenal year. Our relationship has, uh, started before our first party service with FSX N but definitely just, um, uh, the trajectory, um, between the two companies since the announcement about nine months ago has just taken off to a, a new level. Um, we feel like an extended part of the family. We worked together seamlessly. A lot of the people in my team often say we feel like Amazonians. Um, and we're really part of this transformation at NetApp from being that storage hardware company into being an ISV and a cloud company. And we could not do this without the partnership with AWS and without the, uh, first party service of Fs XM that we've recently released. Um, I think that those joint values that Danielle referred to are critical to our success, um, starting with customer obsession and always making sure that we are doing the right thing for the customer. >>We coach our team teams all the time on if you are doing the right thing for the customers, you cannot do anything wrong. Just always put the customer at the, in the center of your decisions. And I think that there is, um, a lot of best practice sharing and collaboration as we go through this change. And I think a lot of it is led by the diverse backgrounds that are on the team, um, female, male, um, race and so forth, and just to really, uh, have different perspectives and different experiences about how we approach this change. Um, so we definitely feel like a part of the family. Uh, we are absolutely loving, uh, working with the AWS team and our team knows that we are the right place, the right time with the right people. >>I love that last question for each of you. And I wanna stick with you Stephanie advice to your younger self, think back five years. What advice would you seen what you've accomplished and maybe the thet route that you've taken along the way, what would you advise your youngest Stephanie self. >>Uh, I would say keep being curious, right? Keep being curious, keep asking questions. And sometimes when you get a no, it's not a bad thing, it just means not right now and find out why and, and try to get feedback as to why maybe that wasn't the right opportunity for you. But, you know, just go for what you want. Continue to be curious, continue to ask questions and find a support network of people around you that wanna help you because they are there and they, they wanna see you be successful too. So never be shy about that stuff. >><laugh> absolutely. And I always say failure does not have to be an, a bad F word. A no can be the beginning of something. Amazing. Danielle, same question for you. Thinking back to when you first started in your career, what advice would you give your younger self? >>Yeah, I think the advice I'd give my younger self would be, don't be afraid to put yourself out there. Um, it's certainly, you know, coming from an engineering background, maybe you wanna stay behind the scenes, not, not do a presentation, not do a public speaking event, those types of things, but back to what the community really needs, this thing. Um, you know, I genuinely now, uh, took me a while to realize it, but I realized I needed to put myself out there in order to, um, you know, allow younger women to see what they could be. So that would be the advice I would give. Don't be afraid to put yourself out there. >>Absolutely. That advice that you both gave are, is so fantastic, so important and so applicable to everybody. Um, don't be afraid to put yourself out there, ask questions. Don't be afraid of a, no, that it's all gonna happen at some point or many points along the way. That can also be good. So thank you ladies. You inspired me. I appreciate you sharing what AWS and NetApp are doing together to strengthen diversity, to strengthen performance and the advice that you both shared for your younger selves was brilliant. Thank you. >>Thank you. >>Thank you >>For my guests. I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the AWS partner showcase. See you next time. Hey everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase season one, episode three women in tech. I'm your host, Lisa Martin. I've got two female rock stars joining me. Next Vero Reynolds is here engineering manager, telemetry at honeycomb, and one of our cube alumni, Danielle Ock ISV PSA director at AWS. Join us as well. Ladies. It's great to have you talking about a very important topic today. >>Thanks for having us. >>Yeah, thanks for having me. Appreciate it. >>Of course, Vera, let's go ahead and start with you. Tell me about your background and tech. You're coming up on your 10th anniversary. Happy anniversary. >>Thank you. That's right. I can't believe it's been 10 years. Um, but yeah, I started in tech in 2012. Um, I was an engineer for most of that time. Uh, and just recently as a March, switched to engineering management here at honeycomb and, um, you know, throughout my career, I was very much interested in all the things, right. And it was a big FOMO as far as trying a few different, um, companies and products. And I've done things from web development to mobile to platforms. Um, it would be apt to call me a generalist. Um, and in the more recent years I was sort of gravitating more towards developer tool space. And for me that, uh, came in the form of cloud Foundry circle CI and now honeycomb. Um, I actually had my eye on honeycomb for a while before joining, I came across a blog post by charity majors. >>Who's one of our founders and she was actually talking about management and how to pursue that and whether or not it's right, uh, for your career. And so I was like, who is this person? I really like her, uh, found the company. They were pretty small at the time. So I was sort of keeping my eye on them. And then when the time came around for me to look again, I did a little bit more digging, uh, found a lot of talks about the product. And on the one hand they really spoke to me as the solution. They talked about developers owning their coding production and answering questions about what is happening, what are your users seeing? And I felt that pain, I got what they were trying to do. And also on the other hand, every talk I saw at the time was from, uh, an amazing woman <laugh>, which I haven't seen before. Uh, so I came across charity majors again, Christine Y our other founder, and then Liz Jones, who's our principal developer advocate. And that really sealed the deal for me as far as wanting to work here. >>Yeah. Honeycomb is interesting. This is a female founded company. You're two leaders. You mentioned that you like the technology, but you were also attracted because you saw females in the leadership position. Talk to me a little bit about what that's like working for a female led organization at honeycomb. >>Yeah. You know, historically, um, we have tried not to over index on that because there was this, uh, maybe fear awareness of, um, it taking away from our legitimacy as an engineering organization, from our success as a company. Um, but I'm seeing that, uh, rhetoric shift recently because we believe that with great responsibility, uh, with great power comes great responsibility, and we're trying to be more intentional as far as using that attribute of our company. Um, so I would say that for me, it was, um, a choice between a few offers, right. And that was a selling point for sure, because again, I've never experienced it and I've really seen how much they walk that walk. Um, even me being here and me moving into management, I think were both, um, ways in which they really put a lot of trust and support in me. And so, um, I it's been a great ride. >>Excellent. Sounds like it. Before we bring Danielle in to talk about the partnership. I do wanna have you there talk to the audience a little bit about honeycomb, what technology it's delivering and what are its differentiators. >>Yeah, absolutely. Um, so honeycomb is an observability tool, uh, that enables engineers to answer questions about the code that runs in production. And, um, we work with a number of various customers. Some of them are Vanguards, slack. Hello, fresh, just to name a couple, if you're not familiar with observability tooling, it's akin to traditional application performance monitoring, but we believe that observability is succeeding APM because, uh, APM tools were built at the time of monoliths and they just weren't designed to help us answer questions about complex distributed systems that we work with today, where things can go wrong anywhere in that chain. And you can't predict what you're gonna need to ask ahead of time. So some of the ways that we are different is our ability to store and query really rich data, which we believe is the key to understanding those complex systems. >>What I mean by rich data is, um, something that has a lot of attributes. So for example, when an error happens, knowing who it happened to, which user ID, which, um, I don't know, region, they were in, um, what, what, what they were doing at the time and what was happening at the rest of your system. And our ingest engine is really fast. You can do it in as little as three seconds and we call data like this. I said, kind of rich data, contextual data. We refer it as having high ality and high dimensionality, which are big words. But at the end of the day, what that means is we can store and we can query the data. We can do it really fast. And to give you an example of how that looks for our customers, let's say you have a developer team who are using comb to understand and observe their system. >>And they get a report that a user is experiencing a slowdown or something's wrong. They can go into comb and figure out that this only happens to users who are using a particular language pack with their app. And they operated their app last week, that it only happens when they are trying to upload a file. And so it's this level of granularity and being able to zoom in and out, um, under your data that allows you to understand what's happening, especially when you have an incident going on, right. Or your really important high profile customer is telling you that something's wrong. And we can do that. Even if everything else in your other tools looks fine, right? All of your dashboards are okay. You're not actually getting paged on it, but your customers are telling you that something's wrong. Uh, and we believe that's where we shine in helping you there. >>Excellent. It sounds like that's where you really shine that real time visibility is so critical these days. Danielle, Danielle, wanna bring you into the conversation. Talk to us a little bit about the honeycomb partnership from the AWS lens. >>Yeah. So excuse me, observability is obviously a very important, uh, segment in the cloud space, very important to AWS, um, because a lot of all of our customers, uh, as they build their systems distributed, they need to be able to see where, where things are happening in the complex systems that they're building. And so honeycomb is a, is an advanced technology partner. Um, they've been working with us for quite some time and they have a, uh, their solution is listed on the marketplace. Um, definitely something that we see a lot of demand with our customers and they have many integrations, uh, which, you know, we've seen is key to success. Um, being able to work seamlessly with the rest of the services inside of the AWS platform. And I know that they've done some, some great things with people who are trying to develop games on top of AWS, uh, things in that area as well. And so, uh, very important partner in the observa observability market that we have >>Back to you, let's kind of unpack the partnership, the significance that honeycomb ha is getting from being partners with an organization as potent and pivotal as AWS. >>Yeah, absolutely. Um, I know this predates me to some extent, but I know for a long time, AWS and honeycomb has really pushed the envelope together. And, um, I think it's a beneficial relationship for both ends. There's kind of two ways of looking at it. On the one side, there is our own infrastructure. So honeycomb runs on AWS and actually one of our critical workloads that supports that fast query engine that I mentioned uses Lambda. And it does so in a pretty Orthodox way. So we've had a longstanding conversation with the AWS team as far as drawing outside those lines and kind of figuring out how to use this technology in a way that works for us and hopefully will work for other customers of theirs as well. Um, that also allows us to ask for early access for certain features when they become available. >>And then that way we can be sort of the Guinea pigs and try things out, um, in a way that migrates our system and optimizes our own performance, but also allows again, other customers of AWS to follow in that path. And then the other side of that partnership is really supporting our customers who are both honeycomb users and AWS users, because it's, as you imagine, quite a big overlap, and there are certain ways in which we can allow our customers to more easily get their data from AWS to honeycomb. So for example, last year we built a tool, um, based on the new Lambda extension capability that allowed our users who run their applications in Lambdas to get that telemetry data out of their applications and into honeycomb. And it man was win, win. >>Excellent. So I'm hearing a lot of synergies from a technology perspective, you're sticking with you, and then Danielle will bring you in, let's talk about how honeycomb supports D and I across its organization. And how is that synergistic with AWS's approach? Yeah, >>Yeah, absolutely. So I sort of alluded to that hesitancy to over index on the women led aspect of ourselves. Um, but again, a lot of things are shifting, we're growing a lot. And so we are recognizing that we need to be more intentional with our DEI initiatives, and we also notice that we can do better and we should do better. And to that, and we're doing a few things differently, um, that are pretty recent initiatives. We are partnering with organizations that help us target specific communities that are underrepresented in tech. Um, some examples would be after tech hu Latinas in tech among, um, a number of others. And another initiative is DEI head start. That's something that is an internal, um, practice that we started that includes reaching out to underrepresented applicants before any new job for honeycomb becomes live. So before we posted to LinkedIn, before it's even live on our job speech, and the idea there is to kind of balance our pipeline of applicants, which the hope is will lead to more diverse hires in the long term. >>That's a great focus there. Danielle, I know we've talked about this before, but for the audience, in terms of the context of the honeycomb partnership, the focus at AWS for D E and I is really significant, unpack that a little bit for us. >>Well, let me just bring it back to just how we think about it, um, with the companies that we work with, but also in, in terms of, you know, what we want to be able to do, excuse me, it's very important for us to, you know, build products that reflect, uh, the customers that we have. And I think, you know, working with, uh, a company like honeycomb that is looking to differentiate in a space, um, by, by bringing in, you know, the experiences of many different types of people I genuinely believe. And I'm sure Vera also believes that by having those diverse perspectives, that we're able to then build better products for our customers. Um, and you know, it's one of, one of our leadership principles, uh, is, is rooted in this. I write a lot, it asks for us to seek out diverse perspectives. Uh, and you can't really do that if everybody kind of looks the same and thinks the same and has the same background. So I think that is where our de and I, um, you know, I thought process is rooted and, you know, companies like honeycomb that give customers choice and differentiate and help them, um, to do what they need to do in their unique, um, environments is super important. So >>The, the importance of thought diversity cannot be underscored enough. It's something that is, can be pivotal to organizations. And it's very nice to hear that that's so fundamental to both companies, Barry, I wanna go back to you for a second. You, I think you mentioned this, the DEI head start program, that's an internal program at honeycomb. Can you shed a little bit of light on that? >>Yeah, that's right. And I actually am in the process of hiring a first engineer for my team. So I'm learning a lot of these things firsthand, um, and how it works is we try to make sure to pre-load our pipeline of applicants for any new job opening we have with diverse candidates to the best of our abilities, and that can involve partnering with the organizations that I mentioned or reaching out to our internal network, um, and make sure that we give those applicants a head start, so to speak. >>Excellent. I like that. Danielle, before we close, I wanna get a little bit of, of your background. We've got various background in tag, she's celebrating her 10th anniversary. Give me a, a short kind of description of the journey that you've navigated through being a female in technology. >>Yeah, thanks so much. I really appreciate, uh, being able to share this. So I started as a software engineer, uh, back actually in the late nineties, uh, during the, the first.com bubble and, uh, have, have spent quite a long time actually as an individual contributor, um, probably working in software engineering teams up through 2014 at a minimum until I joined AWS, uh, as a customer facing solutions architect. Um, I do think spending a lot of time, hands on definitely helped me with some of the imposter syndrome, um, issues that folks suffer from not to say I don't at all, but it, it certainly helped with that. And I've been leading teams at AWS since 2015. Um, so it's really been a great ride. Um, and like I said, I'm very happy to see all of our engineering teams change, uh, as far as their composition. And I'm, I'm grateful to be part of it. >>It's pretty great to be able to witness that composition change for the better last question for each of you. And we're almost out of time and Danielle, I'm gonna stick with you. What's your advice, your recommendations for women who either are thinking about getting into tech or those who may be in tech, maybe they're in individual positions and they're not sure if they should apply for that senior leadership position. What do you advise them to do? >>I mean, definitely for the individual contributors, tech tech is a great career, uh, direction, um, and you will always be able to find women like you, you have to maybe just work a little bit harder, uh, to join, have community, uh, in that. But then as a leader, um, representation is very important and we can bring more women into tech by having more leaders. So that's my, you just have to take the lead, >>Take the lead, love that there. Same question for you. What's your advice and recommendations for those maybe future female leaders in tech? >>Yeah, absolutely. Um, Danielle mentioned imposter syndrome and I think we all struggle with it from time to time, no matter how many years it's been. And I think for me, for me, the advice would be if you're starting out, don't be afraid to ask, uh, questions and don't be afraid to kind of show a little bit of ignorance because we've all been there. And I think it's on all of us to remember what it's like to not know how things work. And on the flip side of that, if you are a more senior IC or, uh, in a leadership role, also being able to model just saying, I don't know how this works and going and figuring out answers together because that was a really powerful shift for me early in my career is just to feel like I can say that I don't know something. >>I totally agree. I've been in that same situation where just ask the question because you I'm guaranteed, there's a million outta people in the room that probably has the, have the same question and because of imposter syndrome, don't wanna admit, I don't understand that. Can we back up, but I agree with you. I think that is, um, one of the best things. Raise your hand, ask a question, ladies. Thank you so much for joining me talking about honeycomb and AWS, what you're doing together from a technology perspective and the focus efforts that each company has on D E and I, we appreciate your insights. Thank you so much for having us great talking to you. My pleasure, likewise for my guests, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the AWS partner showcase women in check. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase I'm Lisa Martin, your host. This is season one, episode three, and this is a great episode that focuses on women in tech. I'm pleased to be joined by Danielle Shaw, the ISV PSA director at AWS, and the sponsor of this fantastic program. Danielle, it's great to see you and talk about such an important topic. >>Yes. And I will tell you, all of these interviews have just been a blast for me to do. And I feel like there has been a lot of gold that we can glean from all of the, um, stories that we heard on these interviews and good advice that I myself would not have necessarily thought of. So >>I agree. And we're gonna get to set, cuz advice is one of the, the main things that our audience is gonna hear. We have Hillary Ashton, you'll see from TETA there, Reynolds joins us from honeycomb, Stephanie Curry from NetApp and Sue Paris from Jefferson Frank. And the topics that we dig into are first and foremost, diversity equity and inclusion. That is a topic that is incredibly important to every organization. And some of the things Danielle that our audiences shared were really interesting to me. One of the things that I saw from a thematic perspective over and over was that like D Reynolds was talking about the importance of companies and hiring managers and how they need to be intentional with de and I initiatives. And that intention was a, a, a common thing that we heard. I'm curious what your thoughts are about that, that we heard about being intentional working intentionally to deliver a more holistic pool of candidates where de I is concerned. What are your, what were some of the things that stuck out to you? >>Absolutely. I think each one of us is working inside of organizations where in the last, you know, five to 10 years, there's been a, you know, a strong push in this direction, mostly because we've really seen, um, first and foremost, by being intentional, that you can change the, uh, the way your organization looks. Um, but also just that, you know, without being intentional, um, there was just a lot of, you know, outcomes and situations that maybe weren't great for, um, you know, a healthy, um, and productive environment, uh, working environment. And so, you know, a lot of these companies have made a big investments and put forth big initiatives that I think all of us are involved in. And so we're really excited to get out here and talk about it and talk about, especially as these are all partnerships that we have, how, you know, these align with our values. So >>Yeah, that, that value alignment mm-hmm <affirmative> that you bring up is another thing that we heard consistently with each of the partners, there's a cultural alignment, there's a customer obsession alignment that they have with AWS. There's a D E and I alignment that they have. And I, I think everybody also kind of agreed Stephanie Curry talked about, you know, it's really important, um, for diversity on it, on, on impacting performance, highly performant teams are teams that are more diverse. I think we heard that kind of echoed throughout the women that we talked to in >>This. Absolutely. And I absolutely, and I definitely even feel that, uh, with their studies out there that tell you that you make better products, if you have all of the right input and you're getting all many different perspectives, but not just that, but I can, I can personally see it in the performing teams, not just my team, but also, you know, the teams that I work alongside. Um, arguably some of the other business folks have done a really great job of bringing more women into their organization, bringing more underrepresented minorities. Tech is a little bit behind, but we're trying really hard to bring that forward as well to in technical roles. Um, but you can just see the difference in the outcomes. Uh, at least I personally can just in the adjacent teams of mine. >>That's awesome. We talked also quite a bit during this episode about attracting women and underrepresented, um, groups and retaining them. That retention piece is really key. What were some of the things that stuck out to you that, um, you know, some of the guests talked about in terms of retention? >>Yeah. I think especially, uh, speaking with Hillary and hearing how, uh, Teradata is thinking about different ways to make hybrid work work for everybody. I think that is definitely when I talk to women interested in joining AWS, oftentimes that might be one of the first, uh, concerns that they have. Like, am I going to be able to, you know, go pick my kid up at four o'clock at the bus, or am I going to be able to, you know, be at my kids' conf you know, conference or even just, you know, have enough work life balance that I can, um, you know, do the things that I wanna do outside of work, uh, beyond children and family. So these are all very important, um, and questions that especially women come and ask, but also, um, you know, it kind of is a, is a bellwether for, is this gonna be a company that allows me to bring my whole self to work? And then I'm also gonna be able to have that balance that I need need. So I think that was something that is, uh, changing a lot. And many people are thinking about work a lot differently. >>Absolutely. The pandemic not only changed how we think about work, you know, initially it was, do I work from home or do I live at work? And that was legitimately a challenge that all of us faced for a long time period, but we're seeing the hybrid model. We're seeing more companies be open to embracing that and allowing people to have more of that balance, which at the end of the day, it's so much better for product development for the customers, as you talked about there's, it's a win-win. >>Absolutely. And, you know, definitely the first few months of it was very hard to find that separation to be able to put up boundaries. Um, but I think at least I personally have been able to find the way to do it. And I hope that, you know, everyone is getting that space to be able to put those boundaries up to effectively have a harmonious, you know, work life where you can still be at home most of the time, but also, um, you know, have that cutoff point of the day or at least have that separate space that you can feel that you're able to separate the two. >>Yeah, absolutely. And a lot of that from a work life balance perspective leads into one of the next topics that we covered in detail with, and that's mentors and sponsors the differences between them recommendations from, uh, the women on the panel about how to combat imposter syndrome, but also how to leverage mentors and sponsors throughout your career. One of the things that, that Hillary said that I thought was fantastic, advice were mentors and sponsors are concerned is, is be selective in picking your bosses. We often see people, especially younger folks, not necessarily younger folks. I shouldn't say that that are attracted to a company it's brand maybe, and think more about that than they do the boss or bosses that can help guide them along the way. But I thought that was really poignant advice that Hillary provided something that I'm gonna take into consideration myself. >>Yeah. And I honestly hadn't thought about that, but as I reflect through my own career, I can see how I've had particular managers who have had a major impact on helping me, um, with my career. But, you know, if you don't have the ability to do that, or maybe that's not a luxury that you have, I think even if you're able to, you know, find a mentor for a period of time or, um, you know, just, just enable for you to be able to get from say a point a to point B just for a temporary period. Um, just so you can grow into your next role, have a, have a particular outcome that you wanna drive, have a particular goal in mind find that person who's been there and done that and can really help you get through. If you don't have the luxury of picking your manager mentor, who can help you get to the next step. >>Exactly. That, that I thought that advice was brilliant and something that I hadn't really considered either. We also talked with several of the women about imposter syndrome. You know, that's something that everybody, I think, regardless of gender of your background, everybody feels that at some point. So I think one of the nice things that we do in this episode is sort of identify, yes, imposter syndrome is real. This is, this is how it happened to me. This is I navigated around or got over it. I think there's some great advice there for the audience to glean as well about how to dial down the imposter syndrome that they might be feeling. >>Absolutely. And I think the key there is just acknowledging it. Um, but also just hearing all the different techniques on, on how folks have dealt with it because everybody does, um, you know, even some of the smartest, most confident men I've, I've met in, uh, industry still talk to me about how they have it and I'm shocked by it oftentimes, but, um, it is very common and hopefully we, we talk about some good techniques to, to deal with that. >>I think we do, you know, one of the things that when we were asking the, our audience, our guests about advice, what would they tell their younger selves? What would they tell young women or underrepresented groups in terms of becoming interested in stem and in tech and everybody sort of agreed on me, don't be afraid to raise your hand and ask questions. Um, show vulnerabilities, not just as the employee, but even from a leadership perspective, show that as a leader, I, I don't have all the answers. There are questions that I have. I think that goes a long way to reducing the imposter syndrome that most of us have faced at some point in our lives. And that's just, don't be afraid to ask questions. You never know, oh, how can people have the same question sitting in the room? >>Well, and also, you know, for folks who've been in industry for 20, 25 years, I think we can just say that, you know, it's a, it's a marathon, it's not a sprint and you're always going to, um, have new things to learn and you can spend, you know, back to, we talked about the zing and zagging through careers, um, where, you know, we'll have different experiences. Um, all of that kind of comes through just, you know, being curious and wanting to continue to learn. So yes, asking questions and being vulnerable and being able to say, I don't know all the answers, but I wanna learn is a key thing, uh, especially culturally at AWS, but I'm sure with all of these companies as well, >>Definitely I think it sounded like it was really ingrained in their culture. And another thing too, that we also talked about is the word, no, doesn't always mean a dead end. It can often mean not right now or may, maybe this isn't the right opportunity at this time. I think that's another important thing that the audience is gonna learn is that, you know, failure is not necessarily a bad F word. If you turn it into opportunity, no isn't necessarily the end of the road. It can be an opener to a different door. And I, I thought that was a really positive message that our guests, um, had to share with the, the audience. >>Yeah, totally. I can, I can say I had a, a mentor of mine, um, a very, uh, strong woman who told me, you know, your career is going to have lots of ebbs and flows and that's natural. And you know that when you say that, not right now, um, that's a perfect example of maybe there's an ebb where it might not be the right time for you now, but something to consider in the future. But also don't be afraid to say yes, when you can. <laugh> >>Exactly. Danielle, it's been a pleasure filming this episode with you and the great female leaders that we have on. I'm excited for the audience to be able to learn from Hillary Vera, Stephanie Sue, and you so much valuable content in here. We hope you enjoy this partner showcase season one, episode three, Danielle, thanks so much for helping >>Us with it's been a blast. I really appreciate it >>All audience. We wanna enjoy this. Enjoy the episode.

(bright music) >> Welcome to the AWS Partner Showcase. I'm Lisa Martin, your host. This is season one episode three and this is a great episode that focuses on women in tech. I'm pleased to be joined by Danielle Greshock, the ISV PSA director at AWS, and a sponsor of this fantastic program. Danielle, it's great to see you and talk about such an important topic. >> Yes, and I will tell you all of these interviews have just been a blast for me to do and I feel like there has been a lot of gold that we can glean from all of the stories that we heard on these interviews and good advice that I myself would not have necessarily thought of. >> I agree, and we're going to get to (indistinct) 'cause advice is one of the the main things that our audience is going to hear. We have Hillary Ashton, you'll see from Teradata. Vera Reynolds joins us from Honeycomb. Stephanie Curry from NetApp. And Sue Persichetti from Jefferson Frank and the topics that we dig into are, first and foremost, diversity equity and inclusion, that is a topic that is incredibly important to every organization. And some of the things, Danielle, that our audiences shared were really interesting to me. One of the things that I saw, from a thematic perspective, over and over, was that, like Vera Reynolds was talking about, the importance of companies and hiring managers and how they need to be intentional with DE&I initiatives and that intention was a common theme that we heard. I'm curious what your thoughts are about that, that we heard about being intentional, working intentionally to deliver a more holistic pool of candidates where DE&I is concerned. What were some of the things that stuck out to you? >> Absolutely, I think each one of us is working inside of organizations where, in the last five to 10 years, there's been a strong push in this direction, mostly because we've really seen, first and foremost by being intentional, that you can change the way your organization looks. But also just that without being intentional there was just a lot of outcomes and situations that maybe weren't great for a healthy and productive environment, working environment. And so a lot of these companies have made big investments and put forth big initiatives that I think all of us are involved in and so we're really excited to get out here and talk about it and talk about, especially as these are all partnerships that we have, how these align with our values. >> Yeah, that value alignment that you bring up is another theme that we heard consistently with each of the partners. There's a cultural alignment. There's a customer obsession alignment that they have with AWS. There's a DE&I alignment that they have and I think everybody also kind of agreed, Stephanie Curry talked about, it's really important for diversity on impacting performance, highly performant teams are teams that are more diverse. I think we heard that kind of echoed throughout the women that we talked to in this episode. >> Absolutely, and I definitely even feel that there are studies out there that tell you that you make better products if you have all of the right input and you're getting many different perspectives. But not just that, I can personally see it in the performing teams, not just my team, but also the teams that I work alongside. Arguably some of the other business folks have done a really great job of bringing more women into their organization, bringing more underrepresented minorities, tech is a little bit behind but we're trying really hard to bring that forward as well in technical roles. But you can just see the difference in the outcomes. At least I personally can, just in the adjacent teams of mine. >> That's awesome, we talked also quite a bit during this episode about attracting women and underrepresented groups and retaining them. That retention piece is really key. What were some of the things that stuck out to you that some of the guests talked about in terms of retention? >> Yeah, I think, especially speaking with Hillary and hearing how Teradata is thinking about different ways to make hybrid work work for everybody, I think that is definitely, when I talk to women interested in joining AWS, oftentimes that might be one of the first concerns that they have. Like, am I going to be able to go pick my kid up at four o'clock at the bus? Or, am I going to be able to be at my kid's conference? Or even just have enough work life balance that I can do the things that I want to do outside of work, beyond children and family. So these are all very important questions that especially women come and ask, but also it kind of is a bellwether for, is this going to be a company that allows me to bring my whole self to work and then I'm also going to be able to have that balance that I need. So I think that was something that is changing a lot and many people are thinking about work a lot differently. >> Absolutely, the pandemic not only changed how we think about work. You know, initially it was, do I work from home or do I live at work, and that was legitimately a challenge that all of us faced for a long time period, but we're seeing the hybrid model, we're seeing more companies be open to embracing that and allowing people to have more of that balance, which, at the end of the day, it's so much better for product development for the customers, as you talked about, it's a win-win. >> Absolutely, and definitely the first few months of it was very hard to find that separation, to be able to put up boundaries, but I think, at least I personally, have been able to find the way to do it and I hope that everyone is getting that space to be able to put those boundaries up, to effectively have a harmonious work life where you can still be at home most of the time, but also have that cutoff point of the day or at least have that separate space that you can feel that you're able to separate the two. >> Yeah absolutely, and a lot of that, from a work life balance perspective, bleeds into one of the next topics that we covered in detail and that's mentors and sponsors, the differences between them, recommendations from the women on the panel about how to combat imposter syndrome, but also how to leverage mentors and sponsors throughout your career. One of the things that Hillary said that I thought was fantastic advice, where mentors and sponsors are concerned, is be selective in picking your bosses. We often see people, especially younger folks, not necessarily younger folks, I shouldn't say that, that are attracted to a company, it's brand maybe, and think more about that than they do the boss or bosses that can help guide them along the way, but I thought that was really poignant advice that Hillary provided, something that I'm going to take into consideration myself. >> Yeah, and I honestly hadn't thought about that but as I reflect through my own career I can see how I've had particular managers who have had a major impact on helping me with my career. But if you don't have the ability to do that or maybe that's not a luxury that you have, I think even if you're able to find a mentor for a period of time or just enable for you to be able to get from, say a point A to point B, just for a temporary period, just so you can grow into your next role. Have a particular outcome that you want to drive. Have a particular goal in mind. Find that person who's been there and done that and they can really help you get through. If you don't have the luxury of picking your manager, at least be able to pick a mentor who can help you get to the next step. >> Exactly, I thought that advice was brilliant and it's something that I hadn't really considered either. We also talked with several of the women about imposter syndrome. You know that's something that everybody, I think regardless of gender, of your background, everybody feels that at some point. So I think one of the nice things that we do in this episode is sort of identify, yes, imposter syndrome is real, this is how it happened to me, this is how I navigated around or got over it. I think there's some great advice there for the audience to glean as well, about how to dial down the imposter syndrome that they might be feeling. >> Absolutely and I think the key there is just acknowledging it but also just hearing all the different techniques on how folks have dealt with it because everybody does. Even some of the smartest, most confident men I've met in industry still talk to me about how they have it and I'm shocked by it oftentimes, but it is very common and hopefully we talk about some good techniques to deal with that. >> I think we do. You know, one of the things that, when we were asking our guests about advice, what would they tell their younger selves, what would they tell young women or underrepresented groups in terms of becoming interested in STEM and in tech, and everybody sort of agreed on the, don't be afraid to raise your hand and ask questions. Show vulnerabilities, not just as the employee, but even from a leadership perspective, show that as a leader. I don't have all the answers. There are questions that I have. I think that goes a long way to reducing the imposter syndrome that most of us have faced at some point in our lives and that's just, don't be afraid to ask questions. You never know how many people have the same question sitting in the room. >> Well and also, for folks who've been in industry for 20, 25 years, I think we can just say that it's a marathon, it's not a sprint, and you're always going to have new things to learn and you can spend, back to we talked about the zigging and zagging through careers where we'll have different experiences, all of that kind of comes through just being curious and wanting to continue to learn. So yes, asking questions and being vulnerable and being able to say, "I don't know all the answers but I want to learn," is a key thing, especially culturally at AWS, but I'm sure with all of these companies as well. >> Definitely I think it sounded like it was really ingrained in their culture. And another thing too that we also talked about is the word no doesn't always mean a dead end. It can often mean, not right now, or maybe this isn't the right opportunity at this time. I think that's another important thing that the audience is going to learn is that failure is not necessarily a bad F word if you turn it into opportunity. No isn't necessarily the end of the road. It can be an opener to a different door and I thought that was a really positive message that our guests had to share with the audience. >> Yeah totally, I can say I had a mentor of mine, a very strong woman who told me, your career is going to have lots of ebbs and flows and that's natural and that when you say that, not right now, that's a perfect example of maybe there's an ebb where it might not be the right time for you now, but something to consider in the future. But also don't be afraid to say yes, when you can. >> Exactly, Danielle, it's been a pleasure filming this episode with you and the great female leaders that we have on. I'm excited for the audience to be able to learn from Hillary, Vera, Stephanie, Sue, and you. So much valuable content in here. We hope you enjoy this Partner Showcase. Season one episode three. Danielle, thank you so much for helping us. >> Thank you. Thank you, it's been a blast. I really appreciate it. >> All right, audience, we want to thank you. Enjoy the episode. (upbeat music)

(bright music) >> Everyone, it's nice to see you. Welcome to the "AWS Partner Showcase". I'm Lisa Martin, your host. This is season one, episode three, and this is a great episode that focuses on women in tech. I'm pleased to be joined by Danielle Greshock, the ISV PSA Director at AWS, and the sponsor of this fantastic program. Danielle, it's great to see you, and talk about such an important topic. >> Yes, and I will tell you all of these interviews have just been a blast for me to do, and I feel like there has been a lot of gold that we can glean from all of the stories that we heard on these interviews and good advice that I myself would not have necessarily thought of. So-- >> I agree, and we're going to get to that. 'Cause advice is one of the main things that our audience is going to hear. We have Hillary Ashton, you'll see from Teradata, Vera Reynolds joins us from Honeycomb, Stephanie Curry from NetApp and Sue Persichetti from Jefferson Frank. And the topics that we dig into are first and foremost, diversity, equity and inclusion. That is a topic that is incredibly important to every organization. And some of the things, Danielle, that our audiences shared were really interesting to me. One of the things that I saw from a thematic perspective over and over was that like Vera Reynolds was talking about the importance of companies and hiring managers and how they need to be intentional with DE&I initiatives. And that intention was a common thing that we heard. I'm curious what your thoughts are about that, that we heard about being intentional, working intentionally to deliver a more holistic pool of candidates where DE&I is concerned. What were some of the things that stuck out to you? >> Absolutely, I think each one of us is working in the inside of organizations where in the last five to 10 years there's been a strong push in this direction. Mostly because we've really seen first and foremost by being intentional, that you can change the way your organization looks. But also just that without being intentional, there was just a lot of outcomes and situations that maybe weren't great for a healthy and productive working environment. And so a lot of these companies have made big investments and put forth big initiatives that I think all of us are involved in. And so we're really excited to get out here and talk about it and talk about, especially as these are all partnerships that we have, how these align with our values. >> Yeah, that value alignment that you bring up is another thing that we heard consistently with each of the partners. There's a cultural alignment, there's a customer obsession alignment that they have with AWS, there's a DE&I alignment that they have. And I think everybody also kind of agreed. Stephanie Curry talked about it's really important for diversity on impacting performance. Highly performing teams are teams that are more diverse. I think we heard that kind of echoed throughout the women that we talked to in this episode. >> Absolutely, and I definitely even feel that there are studies out there that tell you that you make better products if you have all of the right input and you're getting many different perspectives. But not just that, but I can personally see it in the performing teams, not just my team, but also the teams that I work alongside. Arguably some of the other business folks have done a really great job of bringing more women into their organization, bringing more underrepresented minorities. Tech is a little bit behind, but we're trying really hard to bring that forward as well in technical roles. But you can just see the difference in the outcomes. At least I personally can just in the adjacent teams of mine. >> That's awesome. We talked also quite a bit during this episode about attracting women and underrepresented groups and retaining them. That retention piece is really key. What were some of the things that stuck out to you that some of the guests talked about in terms of retention? >> Yeah, I think especially speaking with Hillary and hearing how Teradata is thinking about different ways to make hybrid work work for everybody. I think that is definitely... When I talk to women interested in joining AWS, oftentimes that might be one of the first concerns that they have. Like, am I going to be able to go pick my kid up at four o'clock at the bus? Or am I going to be able to be at my kids' conference, or even just have enough work-life balance that I can do the things that I want to do outside of work beyond children and family. So these are all very important questions that especially women come and ask, but also it kind of is a bellwether for, is this going to be a company that allows me to bring my whole self to work? And then I'm also going to be able to have that balance that I need. So I think that was something that is changing a lot and many people are thinking about work a lot differently. >> Absolutely, the pandemic not only changed how we think about work. Initially it was, do I work from home or do I live at work? And that was legitimately a challenge that all of us faced for a long time period. But we're seeing the hybrid model, we're seeing more companies be open to embracing that and allowing people to have more of that balance which at the end of the day it's so much better for product development for the customers as you talked about, it's a win-win. >> Absolutely. And definitely the first few months of it was very hard to find that separation to be able to put up boundaries. But I think at least I personally have been able to find the way to do it and I hope that everyone is getting that space to be able to put those boundaries up to effectively have a harmonious work life. Where you can still be at home most of the time, but also have that cutoff point of the day or at least have that separate space that you can feel that you're able to separate the two. >> Yeah, absolutely. And a lot of that from a work-life balance perspective leads into one of the next topics that we covered in detail. And that's mentors and sponsors, the differences between them, recommendations from the women on the panel about how to combat imposter syndrome, but also how to leverage mentors and sponsors throughout your career. One of the things that Hillary said that I thought was fantastic advice where mentors and sponsors are concerned is be selective in picking your bosses. We often see people, especially younger folks, not necessarily younger folks, I shouldn't say that, that are attracted to a company, its brand maybe, and think more about that than they do the boss or bosses that can help guide them along the way. But I thought that was really poignant advice that Hillary provided, something that I'm going to take into consideration myself. >> Yeah, and I honestly hadn't thought about that, but as I reflect through my own career, I can see how I've had particular managers who have had a major impact on helping me with my career. But if you don't have the ability to do that or maybe that's not a luxury that you have, I think even if you're able to find a mentor for a period of time or just enable for you to be able to get from say a point A to point B just for a temporary period, just so you can grow into your next role, have a particular outcome that you want to drive, have a particular goal in mind. Find that person who's been there and done that and they can really help you get through if you don't have the luxury of picking your manager, at least be able to pick a mentor who can help you get to the next step. >> Exactly, I thought that advice was brilliant and something that I hadn't really considered either. We also talked with several other women about imposter syndrome. That's something that everybody, I think regardless of gender, of your background, everybody feels that at some point. So I think one of the nice things that we do in this episode is sort of identify, yes, imposter syndrome is real. This is how it happened to me, this is how I navigated around it or got over it. I think there's some great advice there for the audience to glean as well about how to dial down the imposter syndrome that they might be feeling. >> Absolutely. And I think the key there is just acknowledging it, but also just hearing all the different techniques on how folks have dealt with it, because everybody does. Even some of the smartest, most confident men I've met in industry still talk to me about how they have it. And I'm shocked by it oftentimes, but it is very common. And hopefully we talk about some good techniques to deal with that. >> I think we do. One of the things that when we were asking our guests about advice, what would they tell their younger selves, what would they tell young women or underrepresented groups in terms of becoming interested in STEM and in tech. And everybody sort of agreed on the don't be afraid to raise your hand and ask questions. Show vulnerabilities, not just as the employee, but even from a leadership perspective, show that as a leader, I don't have all the answers. There are questions that I have. I think that goes a long way to reducing the imposter syndrome that most of us have faced at some point in our lives. And that's just, don't be afraid to ask questions. You never know how many people have the same question sitting in the room. >> Well, and also for folks who've been in industry for 20, 25 years, I think we can just say that it's a marathon, it's not a sprint, and you're always going to have new things to learn. And you can spend... Back to we talked about the zigging and zagging through careers where we'll have different experiences. All of that kind of comes through just being curious and wanting to continue to learn. So yes, asking questions and being vulnerable and being able to say, I don't know all the answers but I want to learn is a key thing, especially culturally at AWS, but I'm sure with all of these companies as well. >> Definitely I think it sounded like it was really ingrained in their culture. And another thing too that we also talked about is the word, no, doesn't always mean a dead end, it can often mean, not right now or maybe this isn't the right opportunity at this time. I think that's another important thing that the audience is going to learn is that failure is not necessarily a bad F-word if you turn it into opportunity. No isn't necessarily the end of the road. It can be an opener to a different door. And I thought that was a really positive message that our guests had to share with the audience. >> Yeah, totally. I can say I had a mentor of mine, a very strong woman who told me, "Your career is going to have lots of ebbs and flows, and that's natural." And that when you say that, not right now, that's a perfect example of maybe there's an ebb where it might not be the right time for you now, but something to consider in the future. But also don't be afraid to say yes when you can. >> Exactly. Danielle, it's been a pleasure filming this episode with you and the great female leaders that we have on. I'm excited for the audience to be able to learn from Hillary, Vera, Stephanie, Sue and you. So much valuable content in here. We hope you enjoy this partner showcase season one episode three. Danielle, thanks so much for helping us with this. >> Thank you. Thank you, it's been a blast, I really appreciate it. >> All right. Audience, we want to thank you, enjoy the episode. (gentle music)

(upbeat music) >> Hey everyone. Welcome to the AWS partner showcase. This is season one, episode three. And I'm your host, Lisa Martin. I've got two great guests here with me to talk about Women in Tech. Hillary Ashton joins us, the chief product officer at Teradata, and Danielle Greshock is back with us, the ISV PSA director at AWS Ladies. It's great to have you on the program talking through such an important topic. Hillary, let's go ahead and start with you. Give us a little bit of an intro into you, your background and a little bit about Teradata. >> Yeah, absolutely. So I'm Hillary Ashton. I head up the products organization. So that's our engineering, product management, officer of the CTO team at Teradata. I've been with Teradata for just about three years and really have spent the last several decades, if I can say that in the data and analytics space. I spent time really focused on the value of analytics at scale, and I'm super excited to be here at Teradata. I'm also a mom of two teenage boys. And so as we talk about women in tech, I think there's lots of different dimensions and angles of that. At Teradata we are partnered very deeply with AWS and happy to talk a little bit more about that throughout this discussion as well. >> Excellent. A busy mom of two teen boys. My goodness. I don't know how you do it. Let's now look at Teradata's views of diversity, equity and inclusion. It's a topic that's important to everyone but give us a snapshot into some of the initiatives that Teradata has there. >> Yeah, I have to say, I am super proud to be working at Teradata. We have gone through a series of transformations but I think it starts with culture and we are deeply committed to diversity, equity and inclusion. It's really more than just a statement here. It's just how we live our lives. And we use data to back that up. In fact, we were named one of the world's most ethical companies for the 13th year in a row. And all of our executive leadership team has taken an oath around DE&I, that's available on LinkedIn as well. So in fact, our leadership team reporting into the CEO is just about 50/50 men and women which is the first time I've worked in a company where that has been the case. And I think as individuals, we can probably appreciate what a huge difference that makes in terms of not just being a representative, but truly being on a diverse and equitable team. And I think it really improves the behaviors that we can bring to our office. >> There's so much value in that. It's I impressive to see about a 50/50 at the leadership level. That's not something that we see very often. Tell me how you, Hillary, how did you get into tech? Were you an engineering person by computer science or did you have more of a zigzaggy path to where you are now? >> I'm going to pick door number two and say more zigzaggy. I started off thinking that, I started off as a political science major or a government major and I was probably destined to go into the law field but actually took a summer course at Harvard, I did not go to Harvard, but I took a summer course there and learned a lot about multimedia and some programming. And that really set me on a trajectory of how data and analytics can truly provide value and outcomes to our customers. And I have been living that life ever since I graduated from college. So I was very excited and privileged in my early career to work in a company where I found after my first year that I was managing kids, people who had graduated from Harvard Business School and from MIT Sloan School. And that was super crazy 'cause I did not go to either of those schools but I sort of have always had a natural knack for how do you take technology and the really cool things that technology can do, but because I'm not a programmer by training, I'm really focused on the value that I'm able to help organizations really extract value from the technology that we can create, which I think is fantastic. >> I think there's so much value in having a zigzag path into tech. You bring... Danielle, you and I have talked about this many times, you bring such breadth and such a wide perspective that really is such a value add to teams. Danielle, talk to us from AWS's perspective about what can be done to encourage more young women to get, and underrepresented groups as well to get into STEM and stay. >> Yeah, and this is definitely a challenge as we're trying to grow our organization and kind of shift the numbers. And the reality is, especially with the more senior folks in our organization, unless you bring folks with a zigzag path, the likelihood is you won't be able to change the numbers that you have. But for me, it's really been about looking at that, the folks who are just graduating college, maybe in other roles where they are adjacent to technology and to try to spark their interest and show that, yes, they can do it because oftentimes it's really about believing in themselves and realizing that we need folks with all sorts of different perspectives to kind of come in to be able to help really provide both products and services and solutions for all types of people inside of technology which requires all sorts of perspectives. >> Yeah, the diverse perspectives. There's so much value and there's a lot of data that demonstrates how much value, revenue impact organizations can make by having diversity especially at the leadership level. Hillary, let's go back to you. We talked about your career path. You talked about some of the importance of the focus on DE&I at Teradata, but what do you think can be done to encourage, sorry, to recruit more young women and under represented groups into tech, any carrots there that you think are really important that we need to be dangling more of? >> Yeah, absolutely. And I'll build on what Danielle just said. I think the bringing in diverse understandings of customer outcomes, I mean, we've really moved from technology for technology's sake. And I know AWS and Entirety have had a lot of conversations on how do we drive customer outcomes that are differentiated in the market and really being customer-centric. And technology is wonderful. You can do wonderful things with it. You can do not so wonderful things with it as well but unless you're really focused on the outcomes and what customers are seeking technology is not hugely valuable. And so I think bringing in people who understand voice of customer, who understand those outcomes and those are not necessarily the folks who are PhD in mathematics or statistics, those can be people who understand a day in the life of a data scientist or a day in the life of a citizen data scientist. And so really working to bridge the high impact technology with the practical kind of usability, usefulness of data and analytics in our cases, I think is something that we need more of in tech and sort of demystifying tech and freeing technology so that everybody can use it and having a really wide range of people who understand not just the bits and bites and and how to program, but also the value and outcomes that technology through data and analytics can drive. >> Yeah. You know, we often talk about the hard skills but the soft skills are equally, if not more important that even just being curious, being willing to ask questions being not afraid to be vulnerable, being able to show those sides of your personality. I think those are important for young women and underrepresented groups to understand that those are just as important as some of the harder technical skills that can be taught. >> That's right. >> What do you think about from a bias perspective, Hillary, what have you seen in the tech industry and how do you think we can leverage culture as you talked about to help dial down some of the biases that are going on? >> Yeah. I mean, I think first of all, and there's some interesting data out there that says that 90% of the population, which includes a lot of women have some inherent bias in their day to day behaviors when it comes to women in particular. But I'm sure that that is true across all kinds of of diverse and underrepresented folks in the world. And so I think acknowledging that we have bias and actually really learning what that can look like, how that can show up, we might be sitting here and thinking, oh, of course I don't have any bias. And then you realize that as you learn more about different types of bias that actually you do need to kind of account for that and change behaviors. And so I think learning is sort of a fundamental grounding for all of us to really know what bias looks like, know how it shows up in each of us, if we're leaders, know how it shows up in our teams and make sure that we are constantly getting better. We're not going to be perfect anytime soon, but I think being on a path to improvement to overcoming bias is really critical. And part of that is really starting the dialogue, having the conversations, holding ourselves and each other accountable when things aren't going in a copesthetic way, and being able to talk openly about that felt like maybe there was some bias in that interaction and how do we make good on that? How do we change our behavior fundamentally. Of course, data and analytics can have some bias in it as well. And so I think as we look at the technology aspect of bias, looking at at ethical AI I think is a really important additional area. And I'm sure we could spend another 20 minutes talking about that, but I would be remiss if I didn't talk more about sort of the bias and the opportunity to overcome bias in data and analytics as well. >> Yeah. The opportunity to overcome it is definitely there, you bring up a couple of really good points, Hillary. It starts with awareness. We need to be aware that there are inherent biases in data in thought. And also to your other point, hold people accountable, ourselves, our teammates that's critical to being able to dial that back down. Danielle, I want to get your perspective on your view of women in leadership roles. Do you think that we have good representation or we still have work to do in there? >> I definitely think in both technical and product roles we definitely have some work to do. And when I think about our partnership with Teradata, part of the reason why it's so important is, Teradata solution is really the brains of a lot of companies, what they differentiate on, how they figure out insights into their business. And it's all about the product itself and the data, and the same is true at AWS. And we really could do some work to have some more women in these technical roles as well as in the product, shaping the products, just for all the reasons that we just kind of talked about over the last 10 minutes in order to move bias out of our solutions and also to just build better products and have better outcomes for customers. So I think there's a bit of work to do still. >> I agree. There's definitely a bit of work to do and it's all about delivering those better outcomes for customers at the end of the day. We need to figure out what the right ways are of doing that and working together in a community. We've had obviously a lot had changed in the last couple of years. Hillary, what have you seen in terms of the impact that the pandemic has had on this status of women in tech? Has it been a pro, is silver lining, the opposite? What are you seeing? >> Yeah, I mean, certainly there's data out there that tells us factually that it has been very difficult for women during COVID-19. Women have dropped out of the workforce for a wide range of reasons. And that I think is going to set us back all of us, the Royal us or the Royal we back years and years. And it's very unfortunate because I think we're at a time when we're making great progress and now to see COVID setting us back in such a powerful way I think there's work to be done to understand how do we bring people back into the workforce? How do we do that understanding work life balance better, understanding virtual and remote working better. I think in the technology sector we've really embraced hybrid virtual work and are empowering people to bring their whole selves to work. And I think if anything, these Zoom calls have, both for the men and the women on my team. In fact, I would say much more so for the men on my team, we're seeing more kids in the background, more kind of split childcare duties, more ability to start talking about other responsibilities that maybe they had, especially in the early days of COVID where maybe day cares were shut down and maybe a parent was sick. And so we saw quite a lot of people bringing their whole selves to the office which I think was really wonderful. Even our CEO saw some of that. And I think that that really changes the dialogue. It changes it to maybe scheduling meetings at a time when people can do it after daycare drop off and really allowing that both for men and for women, makes it better for women overall. So I would like to think that this hybrid working environment and that this whole view into somebody's life that COVID has really provided for, probably for white collar workers, if I'm being honest for people who are at a better point of privilege, they don't necessarily have to go into the office every day. I would like to think that tech can lead the way in coming out of the old COVID, I don't know if we have a new COVID coming, but the old COVID and really leading the way for women and for people to transform how we do work, leveraging data and analytics but also overcoming some of the disparities that exist for women in particular in the workforce. >> Yeah, I think there's, like we say, there's a lot of opportunity there and I like your point of hopefully tech can be that guiding light that shows us this can be done. We're all humans at the end of the day. And ultimately, if we're able to have some sort of work life balance, everything benefits. Our work, we're more productive, higher performing teams impacts customers. There's so much value that can be gleaned from that hybrid model and embracing for humans. We need to be able to work when we can. We've learned that you don't have to be in an office 24/7 commuting crazy hours, flying all around the world. We can get a lot of things done in ways that fit people's lives rather than taking command over it. I want to get your advice, Hillary, if you were to talk to your younger self, what would be some of the key pieces of advice you would say? And Danielle and I have talked about this before, and sometimes we would both agree on like, ask more questions, don't be afraid to raise your hand, but what advice would you give your younger self and that younger generation in terms of being inspired to get into tech? >> Oh, inspired in being in tech. I think looking at technology as, in some ways I feel like we do a disservice to inclusion when we talk about STEM, 'cause I think stem can be kind of daunting, it can be a little scary for people, for younger people. When I go and talk to folks at schools, I think STEM is like, oh, all the super smart kids are over there. They're all, like maybe they're all men. And so it's a little intimidating. And STEM is actually, especially for people joining the workforce today, it's actually how you've been living your life since you were born. I mean, you know STEM inside and out because you walk around with a phone and you know how to get your internet working and like that is technology fundamentally. And so demystifying STEM as something that is around how we actually make our our lives useful and how we can change outcomes through technology, I think is maybe a different lens to put on it. And there's absolutely, for hard scientists, there's absolutely a great place in the world for folks who want to pursue that, and men and women can do that. So I don't want to be setting the wrong expectations but I think STEM is very holistic in the change that's happening globally for us today across economies, across global warming, across all kinds of impactful issues. And so I think everybody who's interested in some of that world change can participate in STEM. It just may be through a different lens than how we classically talk about STEM. So I think there's great opportunity to demystify STEM. I think also what I would tell my younger self is choose your bosses wisely. And that sounds really funny. That sounds like inside out almost but I think choose the person that you're going to work for in your first five to seven years. And it might be more than one person, but be selective. Maybe be a little less selective about the exact company or the exact title. I think picking somebody that, we talk about mentors and we talk about sponsors and those are important, but the person you're going to spend in your early career, a lot of your day with, who's going to influence a lot of the outcomes for you. That is the person that you, I think want to be more selective about because that person can set you up for success and give you opportunities and set you on course to be a standout or that person can hold you back and that person can put you in the corner and not invite you to the meetings and not give you those opportunities. And so we're in an economy today where you actually can be a little bit picky about who you go and work for. And I would encourage my younger self, I just lucked out actually, but I think that my first boss really set me up for success, gave me a lot of feedback and coaching. And some of it was really hard to hear but it really set me up for the path that I've been on ever since. So that would be my advice. >> I love that advice. It's brilliant. And I think it, choose your bosses wisely, isn't something that we primarily think about. I think a lot of people think about the big name companies that they want to go after and put on a resume, but you bring up a great point. And Danielle and I have talked about this with other guests about mentors and sponsors. I think that is brilliant advice, and also more work to do to demystify STEM. But luckily we have great female leaders like the two of you helping us to do that. Ladies, I want to thank you so much for joining me on the program today and talking through what you're seeing in DE&I, what your companies are doing and the opportunities that we have to move the needle. Appreciate your time. >> Thank you so much. Great to see you, Danielle. Thank you, Lisa. >> Nice to see you. >> My pleasure. For my guests, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the AWS partner showcase season one, episode three. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> And welcome back. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We're excited to welcome Teradata back to theCUBE and today with us at the ARIA is re:MARS conference coverage. It's great to hear with Hillary Ashton, Chief Product Officer of Teradata. Great to have you on. Thanks for coming on. >> John, thanks so much for having me. I'm super excited to be joining you today. >> So re:MARS, what a great event. It brings together the confluence of machine learning, which is data, automation, robotics, and space. Which is to me, is a whole new genre of conversations, around technology and business value. It is going to be a big kind of area. And it's just, again just getting started any one, as they say, and super excited. Tell us about what you guys are doing there and yourself. >> About two and a half years ago I head up the products organization. That means I have responsibility for our roadmap and our and our strategy overall on the product side. Prior to coming Teradata, gosh, I have spent the last 20 years, if I can say that, in the data and analytics space. I grew up in marketing application space, spent 11 years at SaaS, really cut my teeth on hardcore AI, ML and analytics at SaaS, and most recently was at PTC, where I was in charge of, I was a general manager of augmented reality, the business unit at PTC, focused on IOT data and how IOT data and augmented reality can really bring machines to life. >> It's interesting. You talked about SaaS and kind of your background, you know everything SaaSified with the cloud now. So you think about platform as a service, SaaS models emerging, software is an open source game now. So it's an integration cloud-scale data conversation we're seeing. What's your reaction to that? What's your reaction to that kind of idea that, okay, everything's open to source, software value integrating in with data. What's your reaction to that? >> Yeah, I mean, I think open source absolutely has some awesome things going on there. I think there's great opportunities for commercial, reliable, governed software and open source capabilities to come together in an open ecosystem that allow our customers to choose the best way to deliver the analytic outcomes that they're focused on. >> So you guys have been in the news lately around connecting multicloud data analytics platforms and transforming businesses around there, obviously, the background with Teradata is well documented. What's this news about? What's really going on there? You got Vantage platform. What's happening? Take us through that story. What's the key point? >> Yeah, we've worked super hard to deliver a true, multicloud, hybrid, data platform. So, if you think customers, many of our enterprise customers started with on-premises data systems and are moving violently to the cloud, right? So they're super excited about moving to the cloud but being able to deploy on multiple clouds, I think is important and then importantly, sort of this hybrid notion of being able to leverage data that's on-premises and combine it with data in the cloud on AWS, for example. And so being able to do those hybrid use cases you may have data that's like older and kind of archaic, needs to stay on-premises. There's not a lot of value in moving it to the cloud but you want to combine it with some of the innovative, analytic capabilities that perhaps you're doing on AWS. And so Teradata allows you to live in that hybrid multicloud environment and deliver analytic outcomes wherever your data is. >> Hillary, one of the top conversations is data cloud. You got to have a data cloud. I want to deal with this, move this around, but there's a lot of now integration opportunities to bring data from different sources together whether you're in healthcare, all the verticals have the same use case, multiple access to different databases, bringing them all together, ETL, all that old-school stuff is coming back in and being kind of refactored with machine learning, with cloud scale, with platforms like AWS, there's now this new commitment to bringing this to the next level for enterprises. And you mentioned some of those partnerships. What specifically is going on in the cloud that's notable, that's realistically that customers are executing on now? Not the hype, the reality. >> The reality. Yeah, absolutely. So I mean, I think today with Teradata our customers are leveraging something that we call a query fabric. And so this is the idea, as you said, John, that data might be in a lot of different places and you want to be able to get value out of that data without the difficulty of moving it around unnecessarily. Sometimes you want to move it around but unnecessary data movement is both expensive and an inefficient use of precious time. And so I think that there's an opportunity for this query fabric to be able to do remote push-down queries, wherever that data is and return back the results that you are looking for, analytic results, AI and ML results, combining different data that's in different locations to deliver that analytic outcome quickly without having to move the data around. So I would say query fabric is one of the areas that we are super invested in and, today, is delivering real value for our customers. >> It's really interesting. Data being addressable and available, low latency. I mean, we're talking about space, automation, robotics, real-time, so you have different data types stored in different data vehicles or mechanisms that need to be real-time and available. Because machine learning only works as good as the data they has available to it. So again, this is a key, kind of new way that folks are re-architecting. And again, we're here at, at re:MARS, right? I mean to machine learning automation, robotics and space, kind of the real world, physical, digital, trust, scale, huge concepts here. What's the partnership? How's it working with AWS? Take us through that strong partnership that you guys are developing. >> Yeah. I mean, we have a fantastic relationship with AWS. We're really excited that we signed a strategic collaboration agreement at the end of last year that really puts us in an elite category of AWS partners. We're really committed to co-investing and co-engineering with Amazon and our product development organization and also in go-to market and marketing and other parts of our business. As the Chief Product Officer, I'm really excited about three key areas. First is we've optimized Teradata Vantage to run in the AWS cloud at great scale, with unparalleled scale at the highest level for our customers. And so we've partnered with them to be able to handle some of the complex analytic workloads. And we think of analytic models are one part of a workload. There may be other ELT that you talked about, right? Workloads that you may need to run, all of that running at tremendous scale with AWS in the cloud. The second area is deep integration. So Teradata used to think that we were the ecosystem. We built everything soup connects end-to-end. Today, we live in a really exciting data and analytics space and we partner closely with CSPs like AWS, where we are deeply integrated. We have dozens of AWS native integrations in our AWS offer today. And that lets customers take advantage of AWS X3 for Cloud Lake, for example Amazon Kinesis for data ingestion and streaming and on and on. So we're really focused on the integration area there. And then finally, we've developed, co-developed with AWS, a fast and low risk migration approach to move from on-premises to the cloud for our enterprise customers. >> You know, what's interesting is as we kind of weave together, I hear you talking about those three areas. I mentioned earlier at the top of the interview, how integration is now the competitive advantage. Software is almost going commodity with open source because you mentioned that. All good, right? All good stuff. But when you think about kind of the big trends in this new computing world, it's hybrid cloud, it's edge, and IOT, okay? Again, cloud-scale and these new connected points, trust, access, all these things have to be integrated. So integration, you guys have been in the middle, Teradata has been around for a long time, leader in data warehousing, but now with cloud and in the data types, this is a game changer. I mean, this is notable. Can you share more about how you see this evolving with customers because at the end of the day the integration becomes super critical. >> Yeah, absolutely. And I'm super passionate about the opportunities of IOT streaming data. And that's one of the key areas of partnership with Amazon is taking that streaming data, leveraging the analytic opportunities with Amazon. We'll talk about that in just a second, but I think some of the examples that I could share with you, everyone loves to hear, I love to hear, about what actual customers are doing. So Brinker International, they're one of the world's largest casual dining restaurants. If you've ever been to a Chili's Grill or Maggiano's Little Italy those are the guys, Brinker International owns those brands. So we leveraged Amazon SageMaker and Teradata Vantage together to apply advanced analytic and predictive modeling to be able to understand things like demand. And you're in the middle of COVID and trying to understand how many people should you have on staff today? What is the demand going to look like? What should sales look like? What's foot traffic look like? So that demand forecasting capability across their 1,600 different store fronts or restaurant fronts is one of the examples that I could share with you. The other one is Hertz. So one of the world's largest vehicle rental companies. They are using Vantage and AWS together to track and analyze transaction data across all of its global locations and manage again that complex inventory. And some of that is streaming data, some of that is data that we're getting from the cars themselves, and then create a new value-added program to their loyalty members which is sort of the name of the game. Is customer acquisition and extension of brand across those customers. So those are two examples I can share with you. There's many, many others but I know you probably had some other questions. >> Yeah. I want to come back to the SageMaker thing. I think that's important partnership there because it's been one of the fastest growing services. It's always at the top or in the top two or three whenever I talk to Andy Jassy and the team over there. But I want to talk about scalability and I want to ask you, if you can scope for me the scalability of what's going on with this data challenging, 'cause where are we on that scale? Can you share how you would scope the scale? >> Absolutely. And I love talking about scale because it is a home run for Teradata. I think many customers start looking at the cloud and they start with kind of a little tiny baby footprints but we are an enterprise solution, an enterprise platform. And so I think that we're looking at tens of thousands of users and thousands of business critical applications. That's what our customers are doing and have done for decades with Teradata and bringing all of that scale to the cloud. And with AWS in particular, we recently did 1,000 node testing. I'm going to walk through this a little bit slowly, which is hard for me, as you can tell, but it was a single system of more than 1,000 nodes which is just to give you a sense, that's double our largest on-premises system. So it's huge. It was the single largest system. >> John: Double is your largest customer deployment? >> Double our largest customer deployment on-premises. Yeah, that's right. So it was 1,000 nodes with more than 1,000 different users submitting thousands of concurrent queries. So huge enterprise scale. And this was a real-world use case. We took not a traditional benchmark but a real world customer set of mixed workloads. So lots of long running strategic queries and lots of fast running queries that needed really tight SLAs. All of that running simultaneously. We saw no system down times, we were able to roll out and roll back new capabilities seamlessly in a true software as a service fashion. So that was an awesome test all run on AWS. And I think that their team was just as excited as we were about it. >> Well, I love the scale. I love that test you guys ran. I see you're sponsoring re:MARS which is great, congratulations. We love covering since the beginning, we believe of kind of a whole new genre of programming brings together the confluence of exciting technologies that just a decade ago weren't always working together. They were bespoke. >> That's right. Yeah. >> So now it's all integrated in at cloud scale, you got the test, got thousands of concurrents queries. What else are you showcasing? You mentioned the SageMaker because that's really where Amazon's connecting all these tools. How are you integrating in? It sounds like you're bringing all that Amazon goodness in with Teradata and vice versa. >> Absolutely. We're delivering sort of the best in class to our customers jointly. So here re:MARS today, we're really excited to be talking about SageMaker and our relationship with AWS to be able to deliver that seamless integration between our solutions for machine learning services and Teradata Vantage. So I'm sure it won't come as any surprise to you as we just talked about, but we're finding that massive investments in AI and ML and other advanced analytic capabilities are out there, and many organizations are really only experimenting. They're just starting to explore some of these opportunities. We think that there's tremendous value in this scale that we just talked about, that we can offer, combined with best in class AI and ML capabilities like SageMaker. And so we are excited to talk about it. If you want to see it, we've got a booth set up, you can come and take a look at what we're doing there but I think there's huge opportunities for customers to get to the analytic value with Teradata Vantage and AWS SageMaker. >> Yeah, it's great to see Teradata seeing that headroom opportunity to extend the value proposition to kind of new territory with your customers. I can definitely see it. Love the connection here. Where can they learn more about the Teradata partnership with AWS and Amazon? Is there a site? Is there a program coming? Is there any more content that they can be expecting to see? Take a little plug time to plug the company. >> If you insist, I will, John. Thank you. I think, if you're at the event right now, you can swing by Teradata's booth. We're at booth 111. You can get a demo of our SageMaker integration and learn more about both our enterprise scale and the advanced outcomes that we're able to provide to our customers. If you're not at re:MARS and we really think you should be, we would encourage you to sign up for one of our upcoming SageMaker webinars that we're doing with AWS this year. And if you'd like to, you can also just email us at aws@teradata.com. Again, that's aws@teradata.com and we'll set up a private demo for you. >> Well, Hillary Ashton, great to have you on. Chief Product Officer, Teradata, you must be feeling good. You got a lot to work with. You've got an install base. You have new territory to take down. As the Chief Product Officer, you got the keys to the kingdom. Give us a quick bumper sticker of where you guys are going with the product. >> We are fast and furious. My team will tell you, we are so excited to be here with AWS and Teradata is on an epic trajectory forward in our cloud first approach, so we are so excited about our roadmap. If you'd like to learn more, please swing by teradata.com. >> Lot of innovation happening. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. Okay, this is theCUBE coverage of Amazon re:MARS machine learning, automation, robotics, and space. It cuts the confluence of digital, virtual data and real-world and space. You can't get any more than this. That's a big edge out there in space. Talk about edge computing and space. Of course, theCUBE's here covering it. I'm John Furrier, your host. Stay with us for more coverage here at Amazon re:MARS. (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston bringing you data driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is breaking analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Despite fears of inflation, supply chain issues skyrocketing energy and home prices and global instability caused by the Ukraine crisis CIOs and IT buyers continue to expect overall spending to increase more than 6% in 2022. Now, while this is lower than our 8% prediction that we made earlier this year in January, it remains in line with last year's roughly six to 7% growth and is holding firm with the expectations reported by tech executives on the ETR surveys last quarter. Hello and welcome to this week's wiki bond cube insights powered by ETR in this breaking analysis, we'll update you on our latest look at tech spending with a preliminary take from ETR's latest macro drill down survey. We'll share some insights to which vendors have shown the biggest change in spending trajectory. And we'll tap our technical analysts to get a read on what they think it means for technology stocks going forward. The IT spending sentiment among IT buyers remains pretty solid. >> In the past two months, we've had conversations with dozens of CIOs, chief digital officers data executives, IT managers, and application developers, and across the board, they've indicated that for now at least their spending levels remain largely unchanged. The latest ETR drill down data which will share shortly, confirms these anecdotal checks. However, the interpretation of this data it's somewhat nuanced. Part of the reason for the spending levels being you know reasonably strong and holding up is inflation. Stuff costs more so spending levels are higher forcing IT managers to prioritize. Now security remains the number one priority and is less susceptible to cuts, cloud migration, productivity initiatives and other data projects remain top priorities. >> So where are CIO's robbing from Peter to pay Paul to focus on these priorities? Well, we've seen a slight uptick in certain speculative. IT projects being put on hold or frozen for a period of time. And according to ETR survey data we've seen some hiring freezes reported and this is especially notable in the healthcare sector. ETR also surveyed its buyer base to find out where they were adjusting their budgets and the strategies and tactics they were using to do so. Consolidating IT vendors was by far the most cited tactic. Now this makes sense as companies in an effort to negotiate better deals will often forego investments in newer so-called best of breed products and services, and negotiate bundles from larger suppliers. You know, even though they might not be as functional, the buyers >> can get a better deal if they bundle together from one of their larger suppliers. Think Microsoft or a Dell or other, you know, large companies. ETR survey respondents also cited cutting the cloud bill where discretionary spending was in play was another strategy or tactic that they were using. We certainly saw this with some of the largest snowflake customers this past quarter. Where even though they were still growing consumption rapidly certain snowflake customers dialed down their consumption and pushed spending off to future quarters. Now remember in the case of snowflake, anyway, customers negotiate consumption rates and their pricing based on a total commitment over a period of time. So while they may consume less in one quarter, over the lifetime of the contract, snowflake, as do many other cloud companies, have good visibility on the lifetime value of a deal. Now this next chart shows the latest ETR spending expectations among more than 900 respondents. The bars represent spending growth expectations from the periods of December, 2021 that's the gray bars, March of 2022 survey in the blue, and the most recent June data, That's the yellow bar. So you can see spending expectations for the quarter is down slightly in the mid 5% range. But overall for the year expectations remain in the mid 6% range. Now it's down from 8%, 8.3% in December where it looked like 2022 was going to really be a breakout year and have more momentum than even last year. Now, remember this was before Russia invaded Ukraine which occurred in mid-February of this year. So expectations were a little higher. So look, generally speaking CIOs have told us that their CFOs and CEOs have lowered their earnings outlooks and communicated that to Wall Street. They've told us that unless and until these revised forecasts appear at risk, they continue to expect their budget levels to remain pretty constant. Now there's still plenty of momentum and spending velocity on specific vendor platforms. Let's take a look at that. >> This chart shows the companies with the greatest spending momentum as measured by ETRs proprietary net score methodology. Net score essentially measures the net percent of customers spending more on a particular platform. That measurement is shown on the Y axis. The red line there that's inserted that red dotted line at 40%, we consider to be a highly elevated mark. And the green dots are companies in the ETR survey that are near or above that line. The X axis measures the presence in the data set, how much, you know sort of pervasiveness, if you will, is in the data. It's kind of a proxy for market presence. Now, of course we all know Kubernetes is not a company, but it remains an area where organizations are spending lots of resources and time particularly to modernize and mobilize applications. Snowflake remains the company which leads all firms in spending velocity, but as you'll see momentarily, despite its highest position relative to everybody else in the survey, it's still down from its previous levels in the high seventies and low 80% range. AWS is incredibly impressive because it has an elevated level but also a big presence in the data set in the survey. Same with Microsoft, same with ServiceNow which also stands out. And you can see the other smaller vendors like HashiCorp which is increasingly being seen as a strategic cross cloud enabler. They're showing, spending momentum. The RPA vendors you see in there automation anywhere and UI path are in the mix with numerous security companies, CrowdStrike, CyberArk, Netskope, Cloudflare, Tenable Okta, Zscaler Palo Alto networks, Sale Point Fortunate. A big number of cybersecurity firms hovering at or above that 40% mark you can see pure storage remains elevated as do PagerDuty and Coupa. So plenty of good news here, despite the recent tech crash. So that was the good, here's the not so good. So >> there is no 40% line on this chart because all these companies are well below that line. Now this doesn't mean these companies are bad companies. They just don't have the spending velocity of the ones we showed earlier. A good example here is Oracle. Look how they stand out on the X axis with a huge market presence. And Oracle remains an incredibly successful company selling to high end customers and really owning that mission critical data and application space. And remember ETR measures spending activity, but not actual spending dollars. So Oracle is skewed as a result because Oracle customers spend big bucks. But the fact is that Oracle has a large legacy install base that pulls down their growth rates. And that does show up in the ETR survey data. Broadcom is another example. They're one of the most successful companies in the industry, and they're not going after growth at all costs at all. They're going after EBITDA and of course ETR doesn't measure EBIT. So just keep that in mind, as you look at this data. Now another way to look at the data and the survey, is exploring the net score movement over the last period amongst companies. So how are they moving? What's happening to the net score over time. And this chart shows the year over year >> net score change for vendors that participate in at least three sectors within the ETR taxonomy. Remember ETR taxonomy has 12, 15 different segments. So the names above or below the gray dotted line are those companies where the net score has increased or decreased meaningfully. So to the earlier chart, it's all relative, right? Look at Oracle. While having lower net scores has also shown a more meaningful improvement in net score than some of the others, as have SAP and Teradata. Now what's impressive to me here is how AWS, Microsoft, and Google are actually holding that dotted line that gray line pretty well despite their size and the other ironically interesting two data points here are Broadcom and Nutanix. Now Broadcom, of course, as we've reported and dug into, is buying VMware and, and of, of course most customers are concerned about getting hit with higher prices. Once Broadcom takes over. Well Nutanix despite its change in net scores, in a good position potentially to capture some of that VMware business. Just yesterday, I talked to a customer who told me he migrated his entire portfolio off VMware using Nutanix AHV, the Acropolis hypervisor. And that was in an effort to avoid the VTEX specifically. Now this was a smaller customer granted and it's not representative of what I feel is Broadcom's ICP the ideal customer profile, but look, Nutanix should benefit from the Broadcom acquisition. If it can position itself to pick up the business that Broadcom really doesn't want. That kind of bottom of the pyramid. One person's trash is another's treasure as they say, okay. And here's that same chart for companies >> that participate in less than three segments. So, two or one of the segments in the ETR taxonomy. Only three names are seeing positive movement year over year in net score. SUSE under the leadership of amazing CEO, Melissa Di Donato. She's making moves. The company went public last year and acquired rancher labs in 2020. Look, we know that red hat is the big dog in Kubernetes but since the IBM acquisition people have looked to SUSE as a possible alternative and it's showing up in the numbers. It's a nice business. It's going to do more than 600 million this year in revenue, SUSE that is. It's got solid double digit growth in kind of the low teens. It's profitability is under pressure but they're definitely a player that is found a niche and is worth watching. The SolarWinds, What can I say there? I mean, maybe it's a dead cat bounce coming off the major breach that we saw a couple years ago. Some of its customers maybe just can't move off the platform. Constant contact we really don't follow and don't really, you know, focus on them. So, not much to say there. Now look at all the high priced earning stocks or infinite PE stocks that have no E and divide by zero or a negative number and boom, you have infinite PE and look at how their net scores have dropped. We've reported extensively on snowflake. They're still number one as we showed you earlier, net score, but big moves off their highs. Okta, Datadog, Zscaler, SentinelOne Dynatrace, big downward moves, and you can see the rest. So this chart really speaks to the change in expectations from the COVID bubble. Despite the fact that many of these companies CFOs would tell you that the pandemic wasn't necessarily a tailwind for them, but it certainly seemed to be the case when you look back in some of the ETR data. But a big question in the community is what's going to happen to these tech stocks, these tech companies in the market? We reached out to both Eric Bradley of ETR who used to be a technical analyst on Wall Street, and the long time trader and breaking analysis contributor, Chip Symington to get a read on what they thought. First, you know the market >> first point of the market has been off 11 out of the past 12 weeks. And bare market rallies like what we're seeing today and yesterday, they happen from time to time and it was kind of expected. Chair Powell's testimony was broadly viewed as a positive by the street because higher interest rates appear to be pushing commodity prices down. And a weaker consumer sentiment may point to a less onerous inflation outlook. That's good for the market. Chip Symington pointed out to breaking analysis a while ago that the NASDAQ has been on a trend line for the past six months where its highs are lower and the lows are lower and that's a bad sign. And we're bumping up against that trend line here. Meaning if it breaks through that trend it could be a buying signal. As he feels that tech stocks are oversold. He pointed to a recent bounce in semiconductors and cited the Qualcomm example. Here's a company trading at 12 times forward earnings with a sustained 14% growth rate over the next couple of years. And their cash flow is able to support their 2.4, 2% annual dividend. So overall Symington feels this rally was absolutely expected. He's cautious because we're still in a bear market but he's beginning to, to turn bullish. And Eric Bradley added that He feels the market is building a base here and he doesn't expect a 1970s or early 1980s year long sideways move because of all the money that's still in the system. You know, but it could bounce around for several months And remember with higher interest rates there are going to be more options other than equities which for many years has not been the case. Obviously inflation and recession. They are like two looming towers that we're all watching closely and will ultimately determine if, when, and how this market turns around. Okay, that's it for today. Thanks to my colleagues, Stephanie Chan, who helps research breaking analysis topics sometimes, and Alex Myerson who is on production in the podcast. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight they help get the word out and do all of our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our Editor in Chief over at siliconangle.com and does some wonderful editing for breaking analysis. Thank you. Remember, all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. All you got to do is search breaking analysis podcasts. I publish each week on wikibon.com and Siliconangle.com. And of course you can reach me by email at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at DVellante comment on my LinkedIn post and please do check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. This is Dave Vellante for the CUBE insights powered by ETR. Stay safe, be well. And we'll see you next time. (soft music)