>> From Palo Alto, California, it's theCUBE, covering the Conference Board's Sixth Annual Innovation Master Class. (fast techno music) >> Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We are at the Innovation Master Collab at Xerox PARC. It's put on by the Conference Board, a relatively small event, but really, a lot of high-caliber individuals giving really great presentations. And we're excited about our next guest, he kicked the whole thing off this morning, and we could go for hours. We won't go for hours, we'll go about 10 minutes. But Peter Coffee, he's the VP of Strategic Research for Salesforce. Been there a long time, but you were a media guy before that for many, many years? So Peter, great to see you. >> It's good to be with you, thanks. >> So, you talk about so many things. So many things in your opening statement, and I have a ton of notes. But let's just jump into it, I think. One of the big things is you know, the future happens faster than we expect it. And we as humans have a really hard time with exponential growth, because it's not built that way. That's the way things move. >> So how do you as a businessperson kind of deal with that reality? Because the issue is you're never going to be ready for when they come. >> Yeah, well, it's not just humans as individuals, but the institutions and processes we've built. If you look at the process of getting a college degree, it's really seriously misaligned with the timeframe of change. By the time you're a senior, half of the subject matter in your field may be new since your freshman year, and conversely four years after you've graduated, perhaps a third of what you were taught will no longer be considered to be current information. Someone at Motorola once said, "a batch process "no matter how much you accelerate it "doesn't become a continuous flow process". You have to rethink what does a continuous flow look like, and that's useful conversation to have getting back to your actual opening question. When we're talking with customers, we say what are your unvoiced assumptions about the manner in which you have succession of technology, succession of product, and so on? Can we try to see what it would look like if that were a continuous process and not a project process? Many of our partners will tell us that their most difficult conversations with their customers are about getting away from a project mentality, a succession of Big Bang changes, into a process in which transformation is a way of life and not a bold initiative that will take a big sigh of relief and congratulate yourself on having transformed. No, dude, you've gotten your running shoes tied now you can begin to run. But now the hard part begins. >> Right, and the sun comes up tomorrow and you start to run again. You talked on big shifts count on new abundance and use horsepower. >> George Gilder's phrase, "errors are punctuated "by a dramatic change from a scarcity "to an abundance" so for example, horsepower or bandwidth or intelligence. >> So now we're coming into the era of massive big data we are asymptotically approaching free compute, free storage, and free networking. So how do you get business leaders to kind of rethink in an era where they have basically infinite resources, and it always goes back, so what would you build then? Because we're heading that way even if we're not there today. >> A Jedi mind trick that I often use with them is to say, let's not talk about the next couple of quarters, I want you to imagine the next Winter Olympics. When they light the torch four years from now I want you to try to visualize the world you're pretty sure you'll be living in four years from now and work backwards from that and say well if we all agree that within four years that's going to get done, well there's some implications about things we should be doing now and some things that we should stop doing now if we know that four years from now, the world is going to look like this. It helps free your mind from the pressures of incremental improvement and meeting next quarterly goals. And instead saying, ya know, that's not going to be a thing in four years and we should stop getting better at doing something that's simply not going to be relevant in that short of a time. >> So hard though, right? Innovators still, I mean, that's the classic conundrum especially if it's something that you have paying customers and you're driving great revenue to, it's hard to face the music that that may not be so important down the path. >> The willingness to acknowledge that someone will disrupt you, so it might as well be you, you might as well disrupt yourself, the conversation was had with IBM back in the days of the IBM PC, that they thought that that might be a quarter of a million machines they would sell, but whatever you do, don't touch the bread and butter of the 3270 terminal business, right? And they did not ultimately succeed in visualizing the impact of what they had done. Ironically, because they didn't think it was that important, they opened all the technology, and so things like Microsoft becoming what it is and the fact that the bios was open and allowed the compatibles industry like Compact to emerge was a side effect of IBM failing to realize how big of a door they were opening for the world. You can start off a spinoff operation. At Salesforce we have a product line called Essentials which is specifically tasked with create versions of Salesforce that are packaged and priced and supported in a way that's suitable to that small business. And that way you can kind of uncouple from that Clayton Christensen innovators dilemma thing by acknowledging it's a separate piece of the business, it can be measured differently, rewarded differently, and it's going to convey itself maybe even through a genuinely different brand. This is an example that was used once with Disney which when it decided it wanted to get away from family and children's entertainment, and start making movies aimed at more adult audiences, fine, they created the Touchstone brand so they could do that without getting in the way of, or maybe even polluting, a brand that they spent so much time building. So branding is important. A brand is a set of promises, and if you want to make different promises to different people, have a different brand. >> Right, so I'm shifting gears 'cause you touched on so many great things. A really popular thing that's going on now is the conversion of products to services. And repackaging your product as a service. And you talked about the don't taze me bro story which has so many elements of fun and interesting but I thought the best part of it, though, was now they took it to the next step. And we're only a stones throw away from Tesla, a lot of innovation but I think one of the most kind of not reported on benefits of these connected devices and a feedback loop back to the manufacturer is how people are actually using these things, checking in from home, being able to do these updates. And you talk about how the TASER company now is doing all the services, it's not even a service, it's a process. I thought it's awesome. >> Taking a product and selling it at a subscription price does not turn it into a service, even though some people will say, well see now we're moving to a services model. If you're still delivering a product in a lumpy, change-it-every-couple-of-years way, you haven't really achieved that transformation. So you have to go back into more of a sense of I mean, look at the expectation people have of the apps on their smartphones, that they just get better all the time, that the update process is low-burden, low-complexity, low-risk, and you have to achieve that same fluidity of continuous improvement. So that's one of the differences. You can't just take the thing you sell, bill for it on a monthly subscription, and think that you achieved that transition. The thing that they folks who were once TASER and now are Axon, of which TASER is a sub-brand, they managed to elevate their view from the device in a police officer's hand to a process of which that device is a part. Which is the incident that begins, is concluded, results in a report, maybe results in a criminal prosecution, and they broadened the scope of the Axon services package to the point that now it is selling the proposition of increased peace officer productivity rather than merely the piece of hardware that's part of that. So being able to zoom out and really see the environment in which your product is used, and this relates to yet another idea which is that people are saying you got to think outside your box. It doesn't help if you get outside your box, but all of the people with whom you might want to collaborate are all still inside their boxes. And so you may actually have to invest in the transformation and interface development of partners or maybe even competitors, and isn't that a wild idea. Elon Musk at Tesla open sourced a lot of their technology with the specific goal of growing that whole ecosystem of charging stations and other things so Tesla could be a great success. And the comment that I once made is it doesn't help if you're a perfect drop of artisanal oil in a world of water. You have to make the world capable of interacting with you and supporting you if you really want to grow. Or else you're an oddity, you're Betamax, which might have been technically superior but by failing to really build the ecosystem around it, wound up losing big time to VHS for a while. I may have to explain to all of your viewers under the age of 30 what VHS and Betamax even mean. >> I was sellin' those, I could tell you the whole Panasonic factory optimization story, which is whole 'nother piece of that puzzle. So that's good, so I'm going to shift gears again. >> You have to look a big perspective, you have to be prepared to forget that your excellence is your product, and start thinking of that as just the kernel of what needs to be your real proposition which is the need you meet, the pain you address, the process of which you become an inseparable part instead of a substitutable chunk of hardware. >> Well and I think too it's embracing the ongoing relationship as part of the process, versus selling something to your distribution and off it goes you cash the check and you build another one. >> Well that's another aspect, we've got whole industries where there's been a waterfall model. Automobiles were a particular example. Where manufacturers wholesaled cars to distributors who gave them the small markup to dealers who owned the buyer customer. And dealers would be very hostile to manufacturers trying to get involved in that relationship. But now because of the connected vehicles the manufacturer may know things about the manner of use of the vehicle and about the preliminary engagement of the prospective buyer with the manufacturers website. And so improving that relationship from a futile model, or a waterfall model, into a collaborative model is really necessary if all these great digital aspects are to have any value. >> Right, right, right. And as a distribution of information that desire to get a level of knowledge is no longer the case, there's so much more. >> Well it's scary how easy it is to do it wrong. IDC just did a study about the use in retail banking of technology like apps and websites. Which that industry was congratulating itself on adopting in ways that reduce the cost of things like bank office hours. And yet J.D. Power has found that the result is that customers no longer see differentiation among banks, are less loyal, more easily seduced by $50 to open a new bank account with direct deposit. And so innovation's a vector, and if you aim it at cost reduction, you'll get one set of results. And if you aim it at customer satisfaction improvement, you'll innovate differently, and ultimately I think much more successfully. >> Right, right, so we're almost out of time here. I want to go down one more path with you which I love. You talked a lot about visualization, you brought up some old NOPs, really talked about context, right? In the right context, this particular visualization is of value. And there's a lot of conversation about visualization especially with big data. And something I've been looking for, and maybe you've got an answer is, is there a visualization of a billion data point dataset that I can actually look at the visualization and see something, and see the insight. 'Cause most of the ones we see that are examples, they're very beautiful and there's a lot of compound shapes going on, but to actually pinpoint an actionable something out of that array, often times I don't see, I wonder if you have any good examples that you've seen out there where you can actually use visualization to drive insight from a really, really big dataset. >> Well if a big data exercise produces a table of numbers, then someone's going to have to apply an awful lot of understanding to know which numbers look odd. But a billion points, to use your initial question, well what is that? That's an array that's 1,000 by 1,000 by 1,000. We look at 1,000 by 1,000 two-dimensional screens all the time, visualizing a three-dimensional 1,000 by 1,000 cube is something we could do. And if there is use of color, use of motion, superposition of one over another with highlighting of what's changed, what people need most is for their attention to be drawn to what's changing or what's out of a range. And so it's tremendously important that people who are presenting the output of a big data exercise go beyond the high-resolution snapshot, if you will, and construct at least some sense of A B. Back in the ancient days of astronomy, they had a thing called the Blink Camera which would put two pictures side-by-side and simply let you flip back-and-forth between the images, and the human eye turned out to be amazingly good. There could be thousands of stars in that picture, the one dot that's moving and represents some new object, the one dot that suddenly appears, the human brain is very good at doing that. And there's a misperception that the human eye's just a camera. The eye does a lot of pre-processing before it ever sends stuff to the brain. And understanding what human vision does, it impressed the heck out of me the first time I had a consultation on the big data program at a university where the faculty waiting to meet with me turned out to be from the schools of Computer Science, Mathematics, Business, and Visual Arts. And having people with a sense of visual understanding and human perception in the room is going to be that critical link between having data and having understanding of opportunity threat or change. And that's really where it has to go. So if you just ask yourself, how can I add an element of color, or motion, or something else that the human eye and brain have millennia of evolution to get good at detecting, do that. And you will produce something that changes behavior and doesn't just give people facts >> Right, right. Well, Peter, thank you for taking a few minutes. We could go on, and on, and on. >> Happy to do chapters two, three, and four any time you like, yeah. >> We'll do chapter two at the new tower downtown. >> Any old time, thanks so much. >> Thanks for stoppin' by. >> My pleasure. >> He's Peter, I'm Jeff, you're watching theCUBE. We're at the Master Innovation Class at Xerox PARC put on by the Conference Board. Thanks for watching. (fast techno music)

(calm and uplifting music) (moves into soft and soothing music) >> Announcer: Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. Covering Oracle Modern Customer Experience 2017. Brought to you by Oracle. (chill and calm electronic music) >> Hey, welcome back everyone. We are live here at the Mandalay Bay in Las Vegas for theCUBE's special coverage of Oracle's marketing clouds event called Modern CX for Modern Customer Experience. I'm John Furrier, founder of SiliconANGLE, with Peter Burris, head of research at wikibon.com. This is our wrap up of day one. We've got day two coverage tomorrow. Peter, we saw some great news from Oracle on stage. I'll say modernizing their platform, the positioning, certainly, how they're packaging the offering of a platform with the focus of apps, with the additive concept of adaptive intelligence, which gives the notion of moving from batch to realtime, data in motion, and then a series of other enhancements going on. And the guests we talked to have been phenomenal, but what's coming out of this, at least in my mind, I would love to get your reaction to today, is data. Data is the key, and it's clear that Oracle is differentiating with their data. They have a database. They're now bringing their Cloud Suite concept to marketing and extending that out. Interesting. AI is in there, they got some chatbots, so some sizzle, but the steak is the data. So you got the sizzle and you got the steak. >> Well, we heard, you're absolutely right, John. We heard today a lot, and I think this is a terminology that we're going to hear more frequently, is this notion of first person data versus third person data. Where first person data is the data that's being generated by the business and the business's applications and third person data being data that's generated by kind of the noise that's happening in a lot of other people's first person data. And I think that's going to be one of the biggest challenges in the industry. And Oracle has an inside track on a lot of that first person data because a lot of people are big time Oracle customers for big time operational acts, applications that are today delivering big time revenue into the business. >> In the spirit of marketing speak at these events you hear things, "It's outcomes, digital transmissions. "It's all about the outcomes." Agreed, that's standard, we hear that. But here we're seeing something for the first time. You identified it in one of our interviews with Jack Horowitz, which had 150 milliseconds, it's a speeds and feeds game. So Oracle's premise, you pointed out, I'd like to get deeper on this, because this is about not moving the data around if you don't have to. >> Yeah, yeah. >> This is interesting. >> This is a centerpiece of Wikibon's research right now, is that if you start with a proposition that we increasingly through digital transformation are now talking about how we're going to use data to differentiate business, then we need to think about what does it mean to design business, design business activities, design customer promises around the availability of data or the desire to get more data. And data has a physical element. Moving data around takes time and it generates cost, and we have to be very, very careful about what that means, let alone some of the legal and privacy issues. So we think that there's two things that all businesses are going to have to think about, the relationship between data and time. Number one, Can I serve up the right response, the right business action, faster than my competitors, which is going to matter, and number two is can I refine and improve the quality of my models that I'm using to serve things up faster than my competitors. So it's a cycle time on what the customer needs right now, but it's also a strategic cycle time in how I improve the quality of the models that I'm using to run my business. >> What's also interesting is some things that, again that you're doing on the research side, that I think plays into the conversations and the content and conversations here at Oracle's Modern CX event is the notion of the business value of digital. And I think, and I want to get your reaction to this because this is some insight that I saw this morning through my interviews, is that there are jump in points for companies starting this transformation. Some are more advanced than others, some are at the beginning, some are in kindergarten, some are in college, some are graduated, and so on and so forth. But the key is, you're seeing an Agile mindset. That was a term that was here, we had the Agile Marketer, the author of The Agile Marketer, here on our-- Roland Smart, who wrote the book The Agile Marketer. But Agile can be applied because technology's now everywhere. But with data and now software, you now have the ability to not only instrument, but also get value models from existing and new applications. >> Well let's bring it back to the fundamental point that you made up front, because it's the right one. None of this changes if you don't recognize these new sources of data, typically and increasingly, the customer being a new source, and what we can do with it. So go back to this notion of Agile. Agile works when you are, as we talked about in the interview, when you have three things going on. First off, the business has to be empirical, it has to acknowledge that these new sources of information are useful. You have to be willing to iterate. Which means you have to sometimes recognize you're going to fail, and not kill people who fail as long as they do it quickly. And then you have to be opportunistic. When you find a new way of doing things, you got to go after it as hard as you possibly can. >> And verify it, understand it, and then double down on it. >> Absolutely, absolutely. Yeah, customer-centric and all the other stuff. But if you don't have those three things in place, you are not going to succeed in this new world. You have to be empirical, you have to be iterative, and you have to be opportunistic. Now take that, tie that back to some of the points that you were making. At the end of the day, we heard a lot of practitioners as well as a lot of Oracle executives, I don't want to say, be challenged to talk about the transformation or the transition, but sometimes they use different language. But when we push them, it all boiled down to, for the first time, our business acknowledged the value of data, and specifically customer data, in making better decisions. The roadmap always started with an acknowledgement of the role that data's going to play. >> And the pilots that we heard from Time Warner's CMO, Kristen O'Hara, pointed it out really brilliantly that she did pilots as a way to get started, but she had to show the proof. But not instant gratification, it was, "Okay, we'll give you some running room, "three feet and a cloud of dust, go see what happens. "Here's enough rope to hang yourself or be successful." But getting those proof points, to your point of iteration. You don't need to hit the home run right out of the gate. >> Absolutely not. In fact, typically you're not. But the idea is, you know, people talk about how frequently product launches fail. Products, you know, the old adage is it fails 80% of the time. We heard a couple of people talk about how other research firms have done research that suggests that 83 or 84% of leads are useless to salespeople. We're talking about very, very high failure rates here and just little changes, little improvements in the productivity of those activities, have enormous implications for the revenue that the business is able to generate and the cost that the business has to consume to generate those revenues. >> John: I want to get your reaction to-- Oh, go ahead, sorry. >> No, all I was going to say, it all starts with that fundamental observation that data is an asset that can be utilized differently within business. And that's what we believe is the essence of digital business. >> The other reaction I'd like to get your thoughts on is a word that we've been using on theCUBE that you had brought up here first in the conversation, empathy to users. And then we hear the word empowerment, they're calling about heroes is their theme, but it's really empowerment, right? Enabling people in the organization to leverage the data, identify new insights, be opportunistic as you said, and jump on these new ways of doing things. So that's a key piece. So with empathy for the users, which is the customer experience, and the empowerment for the people to make those things happen, you have the convergence of ad tech and mar-tech, marketing tech. Advertising tech and marketing tech, known as ad tech and mar-tech, coming together. One was very good at understanding collective intelligence for which best ad to serve where. Now the infrastructure's changing. Mar-tech is an ever-evolving and consolidating ecosystem, with winners and losers coming together and changing so the blender of ad tech and mar-tech is now becoming re-platformed for the enterprise. How does a practitioner who's looking at sources like Oracle and others grock this concept? Because they know about ads and that someone buys the ads, but also they have marketing systems in place and sales clouds. >> Well, I think, and again, it's this notion of hero and empowerment and enablement, all of them boil down to are we making our people better? And I think, in many respects, a way of thinking about this is the first thing we have to acknowledge is the data is really valuable. The second thing we have to acknowledge is that when we use data better, we make our people more successful. We make our people more valuable. We talk about the customer experience, well employee experience also matters because at the end of the day, those employees, and how we empower them and how we turn them into heroes, is going to have an enormous impact on the attitude that they take when they speak with customers, their facility at working with customers, the competency that they bring to the table, and the degree to which the customer sees them as a valuable resource. So in many respects, the way it all comes together is, we can look at all these systems, but are these systems, in fact, making the people that are really generating the value within the business more or less successful? And I think that's got to be a second touchstone that we have to keep coming back to. >> Some great interviews here this morning on day one. Got some great ones tomorrow, but two notables. I already mentioned the CMO, Kristen O'Hara, who was at Time Warner, great executive, made great change in how they're changing their business practices, as well as the financial outcome. But the other one was Jack Berkowitz. And we had an old school moment, we felt like a bunch of old dogs and historians, talking about the OSI, Open Systems Interconnect Model, seven layers of openness, of which it only went half way, stopped at TCPIP, but you can argue some other stuff was standardized. But, really, if you look at the historical perspective, it was really fun, because you can also learn, what you can learn about history as it relates to what's happening today. It's not always going to be the same, but you can learn from it. And that moment was this grocking of what happened with TCPIP as a standardization, coalescing moment. And it's not yet known in this industry what that will be. We sense it to be data. It's not clear yet how that's going to manifest itself. Or is it to you? >> Well here's what I'd say, John. I think you're right, kind of the history moment was geez, wasn't it interesting that TCPIP, the OSI stack, and they're related, they're not the same, obviously, but that it defined how a message, standards for moving messages around, now messages are data, but it's a specialized kind of a data. And then what we talked about is when we get to layer seven, it's going to be interesting to see what kind of standards are introduced, in other words, the presentation layer, or the application layer. What kind of standards are going to be introduced so that we can enfranchise multiple sources of cloud services together in new ways. Now Oracle appears to have an advantage here. Why? Because Oracle's one of those companies that can talk about end to end. And what Jack was saying, it goes back again to one of the first things we mentioned in this wrap, is that it's nice to have that end to end capability so you can look at it and say "When do we not have to move the data?" And a very powerful concept that Jack introduced is that Oracle's going to, you know, he threw the gauntlet down, and he said "We are going to help our customers "serve their customers within 150 milliseconds. "On a worldwide basis, "anywhere that customer is in the world, any device, "we're going to help our customers serve their customers "in 150 milliseconds." >> That means pulling data from any database, anywhere, first party, third party, all unified into one. >> But you can do it if and only if you don't have to move the data that much. And that's going to be one of the big challenges. Oracle's starting from an end to end perspective that may not be obviously cloud baked. Other people are starting with the cloud native perspective, but don't have that end to end capability. Who's going to win is going to be really interesting. And that 150 millisecond test is, I think, going to emerge as a crucial test in the industry about who's going to win. >> And we will be watching who will win because we're going to be covering it on SiliconANGLE.com and wikibon.com, which has got great research. Check out wikibon.com, it's subscription only. Join the membership there, it's really valuable data headed up by Peter. And, of course, theCUBE at siliconangle.tv is bringing you all the action. I'm John Furrier with Peter Burris, Day one here at the Mandalay Bay at the Oracle Modern CX, #ModernCX. Tweet us @theCUBE. Glad to chat with you. Stay tuned for tomorrow. Thanks for watching. (chill and calm electronic music) >> Announcer: Robert Herjavec >> Interviewer: People obviously know you from Shark Tank but the Herjavec group has been--