Afleveringen
-
The relationship between AI and ethics is both developing and delicate. On one hand, the GenAI advancements to date are impressive. On the other, extreme care needs to be taken as this tech continues to quickly become more commonplace in our lives. In today’s episode, Ovetta Sampson and I examine the crossroads ahead for designing AI and GenAI user experiences.
While professionals and the general public are eager to embrace new products, recent breakthroughs, etc.; we still need to have some guard rails in place. If we don’t, data can easily get mishandled, and people could get hurt. Ovetta possesses firsthand experience working on these issues as they sprout up. We look at who should be on a team designing an AI UX, exploring the risks associated with GenAI, ethics, and need to be thinking about going forward.
Highlights/ Skip to:(1:48) Ovetta's background and what she brings to Google’s Core ML group(6:03) How Ovetta and her team work with data scientists and engineers deep in the stack(9:09) How AI is changing the front-end of applications(12:46) The type of people you should seek out to design your AI and LLM UXs(16:15) Explaining why we’re only at the very start of major GenAI breakthroughs(22:34) How GenAI tools will alter the roles and responsibilities of designers, developers, and product teams(31:11) The potential harms of carelessly deploying GenAI technology(42:09) Defining acceptable levels of risk when using GenAI in real-world applications(53:16) Closing thoughts from Ovetta and where you can find herQuotes from Today’s Episode“If artificial intelligence is just another technology, why would we build entire policies and frameworks around it? The reason why we do that is because we realize there are some real thorny ethical issues [surrounding AI]. Who owns that data? Where does it come from? Data is created by people, and all people create data. That’s why companies have strong legal, compliance, and regulatory policies around [AI], how it’s built, and how it engages with people. Think about having a toddler and then training the toddler on everything in the Library of Congress and on the internet. Do you release that toddler into the world without guardrails? Probably not.” - Ovetta Sampson (10:03)“[When building a team] you should look for a diverse thinker who focuses on the limitations of this technology- not its capability. You need someone who understands that the end destination of that technology is an engagement with a human being. You need somebody who understands how they engage with machines and digital products. You need that person to be passionate about testing various ways that relationships can evolve. When we go from execution on code to machine learning, we make a shift from [human] agency to a shared-agency relationship. The user and machine both have decision-making power. That’s the paradigm shift that [designers] need to understand. You want somebody who can keep that duality in their head as they’re testing product design.” - Ovetta Sampson (13:45)“We’re in for a huge taxonomy change. There are words that mean very specific definitions today. Software engineer. Designer. Technically skilled. Digital. Art. Craft. AI is changing all that. It’s changing what it means to be a software engineer. Machine learning used to be the purview of data scientists only, but with GenAI, all of that is baked in to Gemini. So, now you start at a checkpoint, and you’re like, all right, let’s go make an API, right? So, the skills, the understanding, the knowledge, the taxonomy even, how we talk about these things, how do we talk about the machine who speaks to us talks to us, who could create a podcast out of just voice memos?” - Ovetta Sampson (24:16)“We have to be very intentional [when building AI tools], and that’s the kind of folks you want on teams. [Designers] have to go and play scary scenarios. We have to do that. No designer wants to be “Negative Nancy,” but this technology has huge potential to harm. It has harmed. If we don’t have the skill sets to recognize, document, and minimize harm, that needs to be part of our skill set. If we’re not looking out for the humans, then who actually is?” - Ovetta Sampson (32:10)“[Research shows] things happen to our brain when we’re exposed to artificial intelligence… there are real human engagement risks that are an opportunity for design. When you’re designing a self-driving car, you can’t just let the person go to sleep unless the car is fully [automated] and every other car on the road is self-driving. If there are humans behind the wheel, you need to have a feedback loop system—something that’s going to happen [in case] the algorithm is wrong. If you don’t have that designed, there’s going to be a large human engagement risk that a car is going to run over somebody who’s [for example] pushing a bike up a hill[...] Why? The car could not calculate the right speed and pace of a person pushing their bike. It had the speed and pace of a person walking, the speed and pace of a person on a bike, but not the two together. Algorithms will be wrong, right?” - Ovetta Sampson (39:42)“Model goodness used to be the purview of companies and the data scientists. Think about the first search engines. Their model goodness was [about] 77%. That’s good, right? And then people started seeing photos of apes when [they] typed in ‘black people.’ Companies have to get used to going to their customers in a wide spectrum and asking them when they’re [models or apps are] right and wrong. They can’t take on that burden themselves anymore. Having ethically sourced data input and variables is hard work. If you’re going to use this technology, you need to put into place the governance that needs to be there.” - Ovetta Sampson (44:08) -
Sometimes DIY UI/UX design only gets you so far—and you know it’s time for outside help. One thing prospects from SAAS analytics and data-related product companies often ask me is how things are like in the other guy/gal’s backyard. They want to compare their situation to others like them. So, today, I want to share some of the common “themes” I see that usually are the root causes of what leads to a phone call with me.
By the time I am on the phone with most prospects who already have a product in market, they’re usually either having significant problems with 1 or more of the following: sales friction (product value is opaque); low adoption/renewal worries (user apathy), customer complaints about UI/UX being hard to use; velocity (team is doing tons of work, but leader isn’t seeing progress)—and the like.
I’m hoping today’s episode will explain some of the root causes that may lead to these issues — so you can avoid them in your data product building work!
Highlights/ Skip to:(10:47) Design != "front-end development" or analyst work(12:34) Liking doing UI/UX/viz design work vs. knowing (15:04) When a leader sees lots of work being done, but the UX/design isn’t progressing(17:31) Your product’s UX needs to convey some magic IP/special sauce…but it isn’t(20:25) Understanding the tradeoffs of using libraries, templates, and other solution’s design as a foundation for your own (25:28) The sunk cost bias associated with POCs and “we’ll iterate on it”(28:31) Relying on UI/UX "customization" to please all customers(31:26) The hidden costs of abstraction of system objects, UI components, etc. to make life easier for engineering and technical teams(32:32) Believing you’ll know the design is good “when you see it” (and what you don’t know you don’t know)(36:43) Believing that because the data science/AI/ML modeling under your solution was, accurate, difficult, and/or expensive makes it automatically worth paying for Quotes from Today’s EpisodeThe challenge is often not knowing what you don’t know about a project. We often end up focusing on building the tech [and rushing it out] so we can get some feedback on it… but product is not about getting it out there so we can get feedback. The goal of doing product well is to produce value, benefits, or outcomes. Learning is important, but that’s not what the objective is. The objective is benefits creation. (5:47)When we start doing design on a project that’s not design actionable, we build debt and sometimes can hurt the process of design. If you start designing your product with an entire green space, no direction, and no constraints, the chance of you shipping a good v1 is small. Your product strategy needs to be design-actionable for the team to properly execute against it. (19:19)While you don’t need to always start at zero with your UI/UX design, what are the parts of your product or application that do make sense to borrow , “steal” and cheat from? And when does it not? It takes skill to know when you should be breaking the rules or conventions. Shortcuts often don’t produce outsized results—unless you know what a good shortcut looks like. (22:28)A proof of concept is not a minimum valuable product. There’s a difference between proving the tech can work and making it into a product that’s so valuable, someone would exchange money for it because it’s so useful to them. Whatever that value is, these are two different things. (26:40)Trying to do a little bit for everybody [through excessive customization] can often result in nobody understanding the value or utility of your solution. Customization can hide the fact the team has decided not to make difficult choices. If you’re coming into a crowded space… it’s like’y not going to be a compelling reason to [convince customers to switch to your solution]. Customization can be a tax, not a benefit. (29:26)Watch for the sunk cost bias [in product development]. [Buyers] don’t care how the sausage was made. Many don’t understand how the AI stuff works, they probably don’t need to understand how it works. They want the benefits downstream from technology wrapped up in something so invaluable they can’t live without it. Watch out for technically right, effectively wrong. (39:27) -
Zijn er afleveringen die ontbreken?
-
In today’s episode, I’m joined by John Felushko, a product manager at LabStats who impressed me after we recently had a 1x1 call together. John and his team have developed a successful product that helps universities track and optimize their software and hardware usage so schools make smart investments. However, John also shares how culture and value are very tied together—and why their product isn’t a fit for every school, and every country. John shares how important customer relationships are , how his team designs great analytics user experiences, how they do user research, and what he learned making high-end winter sports products that’s relevant to leading a SAAS analytics product. Combined with John’s background in history and the political economy of finance, John paints some very colorful stories about what they’re getting right—and how they’ve course corrected over the years at LabStats.
Highlights/ Skip to:
(0:46) What is the LabStats product (2:59) Orienting analytics around customer value instead of IT/data(5:51) "Producer of Persistently Profitable Product Process"(11:22) How they make product adjustments based on previous failures(15:55) Why a lack of cultural understanding caused LabStats to fail internationally(18:43) Quantifying value beyond dollars and cents(25:23) How John is able to work so closely with his customers without barriers(30:24) Who makes up the LabStats product research team(35:04) How strong customer relationships help inform the UX design process(38:29) Getting senior management to accept that you can't regularly and accurately predict when you’ll be feature-complete and ship(43:51) Where John learned his skills as a successful product manager(47:20) Where you can go to cultivate the non-technical skills to help you become a better SAAS analytics product leader(51:00) What advice would John Felushko have given himself 10 years ago?(56:19) Where you can find more from John FelushkoQuotes from Today’s Episode“The product process is [essentially] really nothing more than the scientific method applied to business. Every product is an experiment - it has a hypothesis about a problem it solves. At LabStats [we have a process] where we go out and clearly articulate the problem. We clearly identify who the customers are, and who are [people at other colleges] having that problem. Incrementally and as inexpensively as possible, [we] test our solutions against those specific customers. The success rate [of testing solutions by cross-referencing with other customers] has been extremely high.” - John Felushko (6:46)“One of the failures I see in Americans is that we don’t realize how much culture matters. Americans have this bias to believe that whatever is valuable in my culture is valuable in other cultures. Value is entirely culturally determined and subjective. Value isn’t a number on a spreadsheet. [LabStats positioned our producty] as something that helps you save money and be financially efficient. In French government culture, financial efficiency is not a top priority. Spending government money on things like education is seen as a positive good. The more money you can spend on it, the better. So, the whole message of financial efficiency wasn’t going to work in that market.” - John Felushko (16:35)“What I’m really selling with data products is confidence. I’m selling assurance. I’m selling an emotion. Before I was a product manager, I spent about ten years in outdoor retail, selling backpacks and boots. What I learned from that is you’re always selling emotion, at every level. If you can articulate the ROI, the real value is that the buyer has confidence they bought the right thing.” - John Felushko (20:29)“[LabStats] has three massive, multi-million dollar horror stories in our past where we [spent] millions of dollars in development work for no results. No ROI. Horror stories are what shape people’s values more than anything else. Avoiding negative outcomes is what people avoid more than anything else. [It’s important to] tell those stories and perpetuate those [lessons] through the culture of your organization. These are the times we screwed up, and this is what we learned from it—do you want to screw up like that again because we learned not to do that.” - John Felushko (38:45)“There’s an old description of a product manager, like, ‘Oh, they come across as the smartest person in the room.’ Well, how do you become that person? Expand your view, and expand the amount of information you consume as widely as possible. That’s so important to UX design and thinking about what went wrong. Why are some customers super happy and some customers not? What is the difference between those two groups of people? Is it culture? Is it time? Is it mental ability? Is it the size of the screen they’re looking at my product on? What variables can I define and rule out, and what data sources do I have to answer all those questions? It’s just the normal product manager thing—constant curiosity.” -John Felushko (48:04) -
In today’s episode, I’m going to perhaps work myself out of some consulting engagements, but hey, that’s ok! True consulting is about service—not PPT decks with strategies and tiers of people attached to rate cards. Specifically today, I decided to reframe a topic and approach it from the opposite/negative side. So, instead of telling you when the right time is to get UX design help for your enterprise SAAS analytics or AI product(s), today I’m going to tell you when you should NOT get help!
Reframing this was really fun and made me think a lot as I recorded the episode. Some of these reasons aren’t necessarily representative of what I believe, but rather what I’ve heard from clients and prospects over 25 years—what they believe. For each of these, I’m also giving a counterargument, so hopefully, you get both sides of the coin.
Finally, analytical thinkers, especially data product managers it seems, often want to quantify all forms of value they produce in hard monetary units—and so in this episode, I’m also going to talk about other forms of value that products can create that are worth paying for—and how mushy things like “feelings” might just come into play ;-) Ready?
Highlights/ Skip to:(1:52) Going for short, easy wins(4:29) When you think you have good design sense/taste (7:09) The impending changes coming with GenAI(11:27) Concerns about "dumbing down" or oversimplifying technical analytics solutions that need to be powerful and flexible(15:36) Agile and process FTW?(18:59) UX design for and with platform products(21:14) The risk of involving designers who don’t understand data, analytics, AI, or your complex domain considerations (30:09) Designing after the ML models have been trained—and it’s too late to go back (34:59) Not tapping professional design help when your user base is small , and you have routine access and exposure to them (40:01) Explaining the value of UX design investments to your stakeholders when you don’t 100% control the budget or decisions Quotes from Today’s Episode“It is true that most impactful design often creates more product and engineering work because humans are messy. While there sometimes are these magic, small GUI-type changes that have big impact downstream, the big picture value of UX can be lost if you’re simply assigning low-level GUI improvement tasks and hoping to see a big product win. It always comes back to the game you’re playing inside your team: are you working to produce UX and business outcomes or shipping outputs on time? ” (3:18)“If you’re building something that needs to generate revenue, there has to be a sense of trust and belief in the solution. We’ve all seen the challenges of this with LLMs. [when] you’re unable to get it to respond in a way that makes you feel confident that it understood the query to begin with. And then you start to have all these questions about, ‘Is the answer not in there,’ or ‘Am I not prompting it correctly?’ If you think that most of this is just an technical data science problem, then don’t bother to invest in UX design work… ” (9:52)“Design is about, at a minimum, making it useful and usable, if not delightful. In order to do that, we need to understand the people that are going to use it. What would an improvement to this person’s life look like? Simplifying and dumbing things down is not always the answer. There are tools and solutions that need to be complex, flexible, and/or provide a lot of power – especially in an enterprise context. Working with a designer who solely insists on simplifying everything at all costs regardless of your stated business outcome goals is a red flag—and a reason not to invest in UX design—at least with them!“ (12:28)“I think what an analytics product manager [or] an AI product manager needs to accept is there are other ways to measure the value of UX design’s contribution to your product and to your organization. Let’s say that you have a mission-critical internal data product, it’s used by the most senior executives in the organization, and you and your team made their day, or their month, or their quarter. You saved their job. You made them feel like a hero. What is the value of giving them that experience and making them feel like those things… What is that worth when a key customer or colleague feels like you have their back with this solution you created? Ideas that spread, win, and if these people are spreading your idea, your product, or your solution… there’s a lot of value in that.” (43:33)“Let’s think about value in non-financial terms. Terms like feelings. We buy insurance all the time. We’re spending money on something that most likely will have zero economic value this year because we’re actually trying not to have to file claims. Yet this industry does very well because the feeling of security matters. That feeling is worth something to a lot of people. The value of feeling secure is something greater than whatever the cost of the insurance plan. If your solution can build feelings of confidence and security, what is that worth? Does “hard to measure precisely” necessarily mean “low value?” (47:26) -
Due to a technical glitch that ended up unpublishing this episode right after it originally was released, Episode 151 is a replay of my conversation with Zalak Trivdei from this past March . Please enjoy our chat if you missed it the first time around!
Thanks,
Brian
LinksOriginal Episode: https://designingforanalytics.com/resources/episodes/139-monetizing-saas-analytics-and-the-challenges-of-designing-a-successful-embedded-bi-product-promoted-episode/
Sigma Computing: https://sigmacomputing.com
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/trivedizalak/
Sigma Computing Embedded: https://sigmacomputing.com/embedded
About Promoted Episodes on Experiencing Data: https://designingforanalytics.com/promoted
-
“Last week was a great year in GenAI,” jokes Mark Ramsey—and it’s a great philosophy to have as LLM tools especially continue to evolve at such a rapid rate. This week, you’ll get to hear my fun and insightful chat with Mark from Ramsey International about the world of large language models (LLMs) and how we make useful UXs out of them in the enterprise.
Mark shared some fascinating insights about using a company’s website information (data) as a place to pilot a LLM project, avoiding privacy landmines, and how re-ranking of models leads to better LLM response accuracy. We also talked about the importance of real human testing to ensure LLM chatbots and AI tools truly delight users. From amusing anecdotes about the spinning beach ball on macOS to envisioning a future where AI-driven chat interfaces outshine traditional BI tools, this episode is packed with forward-looking ideas and a touch of humor.
Highlights/ Skip to:(0:50) Why is the world of GenAI evolving so fast?(4:20) How Mark thinks about UX in an LLM application(8:11) How Mark defines “Specialized GenAI?”(12:42) Mark’s consulting work with GenAI / LLMs these days(17:29) How GenAI can help the healthcare industry(30:23) Uncovering users’ true feelings about LLM applications(35:02) Are UIs moving backwards as models progress forward?(40:53) How will GenAI impact data and analytics teams?(44:51) Will LLMs be able to consistently leverage RAG and produce proper SQL?(51:04) Where can find more from Mark and Ramsey InternationalQuotes from Today’s Episode“With [GenAI], we have a solution that we’ve built to try to help organizations, and build workflows. We have a workflow that we can run and ask the same question [to a variety of GenAI models] and see how similar the answers are. Depending on the complexity of the question, you can see a lot of variability between the models… [and] we can also run the same question against the different versions of the model and see how it’s improved. Folks want a human-like experience interacting with these models.. [and] if the model can start responding in just a few seconds, that gives you much more of a conversational type of experience.” - Mark Ramsey (2:38)“[People] don’t understand when you interact [with GenAI tools] and it brings tokens back in that streaming fashion, you’re actually seeing inside the brain of the model. Every token it produces is then displayed on the screen, and it gives you that typewriter experience back in the day. If someone has to wait, and all you’re seeing is a logo spinning, from a UX experience standpoint… people feel like the model is much faster if it just starts to produce those results in that streaming fashion. I think in a design, it’s extremely important to take advantage of that [...] as opposed to waiting to the end and delivering the results some models support that, and other models don’t.”- Mark Ramsey (4:35)"All of the data that’s on the website is public information. We’ve done work with several organizations on quickly taking the data that’s on their website, packaging it up into a vector database, and making that be the source for questions that their customers can ask. [Organizations] publish a lot of information on their websites, but people really struggle to get to it. We’ve seen a lot of interest in vectorizing website data, making it available, and having a chat interface for the customer. The customer can ask questions, and it will take them directly to the answer, and then they can use the website as the source information.” - Mark Ramsey (14:04)“I’m not skeptical at all. I’ve changed much of my [AI chatbot searches] to Perplexity, and I think it’s doing a pretty fantastic job overall in terms of quality. It’s returning an answer with citations, so you have a sense of where it’s sourcing the information from. I think it’s important from a user experience perspective. This is a replacement for broken search, as I really don’t want to read all the web pages and PDFs you have that *might* be about my chiropractic care query to answer my actual [healthcare] question.” - Brian O’Neill (19:22)“We’ve all had great experience with customer service, and we’ve all had situations where the customer service was quite poor, and we’re going to have that same thing as we begin to [release more] chatbots. We need to make sure we try to alleviate having those bad experiences, and have an exit. If someone is running into a situation where they’d rather talk to a live person, have that ability to route them to someone else. That’s why the robustness of the model is extremely important in the implementation… and right now, organizations like OpenAI and Anthropic are significantly better at that [human-like] experience.” - Mark Ramsey (23:46)"There’s two aspects of these models: the training aspect and then using the model to answer questions. I recommend to organizations to always augment their content and don’t just use the training data. You’ll still get that human-like experience that’s built into the model, but you’ll eliminate the hallucinations. If you have a model that has been set up correctly, you shouldn’t have to ask questions in a funky way to get answers.” - Mark Ramsey (39:11)“People need to understand GenAI is not a predictive algorithm. It is not able to run predictions, it struggles with some math, so that is not the focus for these models. What’s interesting is that you can use the model as a step to get you [the answers]. A lot of the models now support functions… when you ask a question about something that is in a database, it actually uses its knowledge about the schema of the database. It can build the query, run the query to get the data back, and then once it has the data, it can reformat the data into something that is a good response back." - Mark Ramsey (42:02) LinksMark on LinkedInRamsey InternationalEmail: mark [at] ramsey.internationalRamsey International's YouTube Channel -
Guess what? Data science and AI initiatives are still failing here in 2024—despite widespread awareness. Is that news? Candidly, you’ll hear me share with Evan Shellshear—author of the new book Why Data Science Projects Fail: The Harsh Realities of Implementing AI and Analytics—about how much I actually didn’t want to talk about this story originally on my podcast—because it’s not news! However, what is news is what the data says behind Evan’s findings—and guess what? It’s not the technology.
In our chat, Evan shares why he wanted to leverage a human approach to understand the root cause of multiple organizations’ failures and how this approach highlighted the disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers. He explains the human factors at play, such as poor problem surfacing and organizational culture challenges—and how these human-centered design skills are rarely taught or offered to data scientists. The conversation delves into why these failures are more prevalent in data science compared to other fields, attributing it to the complexity and scale of data-related problems. We also discuss how analytically mature companies can mitigate these issues through strategic approaches and stakeholder buy-in. Join us as we delve into these critical insights for improving data science project outcomes.
Highlights/ Skip to:(4:45) Why are data science projects still failing?(9:17) Why is the disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers so pronounced relative to, say, engineering? (13:08) Why are data scientists not getting enough training for real-world problems?(16:18) What the data says about failure rates for mature data teams vs. immature data teams(19:39) How to change people’s opinions so they value data more(25:16) What happens at the stage where the beneficiaries of data don’t actually see the benefits?(31:09) What are the skills needed to prevent a repeating pattern of creating data products that customers ignore??(37:10) Where do more mature organizations find non-technical help to complement their data science and AI teams? (41:44) Are executives and directors aware of the skills needed to level up their data science and AI teams?Quotes from Today’s Episode“People know this stuff. It’s not news anymore. And so, the reason why we needed this was really to dig in. And exactly like you did, like, keeping that list of articles is brilliant, and knowing what’s causing the failures and what’s leading to these issues still arising is really important. But at some point, we need to approach this in a scientific fashion, and we need to unpack this, and we need to really delve into the details beyond just the headlines and the articles themselves. And start collating and analyzing this to properly figure out what’s going wrong, and what do we need to do about it to fix it once and for all so you can stop your endless collection, and the AI Incident Database that now has over 3500 entries. It can hang its hat and say, ‘I’ve done my job. It’s time to move on. We’re not failing as we used to.’” - Evan Shellshear (3:01)"What we did is we took a number of different studies, and we split companies into what we saw as being analytically mature—and this is a common, well-known thing; there are many maturity frameworks exist across data, across AI, across all different areas—and what we call analytically immature, so those companies that probably aren’t there yet. And what we wanted to draw a distinction is okay, we say 80% of projects fail, or whatever the exact number is, but for who? And for what stage and for what capability? And so, what we then went and did is we were able to take our data and look at which failures are common for analytically immature organizations, and which failures are common for analytically mature organizations, and then we’re able to understand, okay, in the market, how many organizations do we think are analytically mature versus analytically immature, and then we were able to take that 80% failure rate and establish it. For analytically mature companies, the failure rate is probably more like 40%. For analytically immature companies, it’s over 90%, right? And so, you’re exactly right: organizations can do something about it, and they can build capabilities in to mitigate this. So definitely, it can be reduced. Definitely, it can be brought down. You might say, 40% is still too high, but it proves that by bringing in these procedures, you’re completely correct, that it can be reduced.” - Evan Shellshear (14:28)"What happens with the data science person, however, is typically they’re seen as a cost center—typically, not always; nowadays, that dialog is changing—and what they need to do is find partners across the other parts of the business. So, they’re going to go into the supply chain team, they’ll go into the merchandising team, they’ll go into the banking team, they’ll go into the other teams, and they’re going to find their supporters and winners there, and they’re going to probably build out from there. So, the first step would likely be, if you’re a big enough organization that you’re not having that strategy the executive level is to find your friends—and there will be some of the organization who support this data strategy—and get some wins for them.” - Evan Shellshear (24:38)“It’s not like there’s this box you put one in the other in. Because, like success and failure, there’s a continuum. And companies as they move along that continuum, just like you said, this year, we failed on the lack of executive buy-in, so let’s fix that problem. Next year, we fail on not having the right resources, so we fix that problem. And you move along that continuum, and you build it up. And at some point as you’re going on, that failure rate is dropping, and you’re getting towards that end of the scale where you’ve got those really capable companies that live, eat, and breathe data science and analytics, and so have to have these to be able to survive, otherwise a simple company evolution would have wiped them out, and they wouldn’t exist if they didn’t have that capability, if that’s their core thing.” - Evan Shellshear (18:56)“Nothing else could be correct, right? This subjective intuition and all this stuff, it’s never going to be as good as the data. And so, what happens is, is you, often as a data scientist—and I’ve been subjected to this myself—come in with this arrogance, this kind of data-driven arrogance, right? And it’s not a good thing. It puts up barriers, it creates issues, it separates you from the people.” - Evan Shellshear (27:38)"Knowing that you’re going to have to go on that journey from day one, you can’t jump from level zero to level five. That’s what all these data maturity models are about, right? You can’t jump from level zero data maturity to level five overnight. You really need to take those steps and build it up.” - Evan Shellshear (45:21)"What we’re talking about, it’s not new. It’s just old wine in a new skin, and we’re just presenting it for the data science age." - Evan Shellshear (48:15)LinksWhy Data Science Projects Fail: The Harsh Realities of Implementing AI and Analytics, without the Hype: https://www.routledge.com/Why-Data-Science-Projects-Fail-the-Harsh-Realities-of-Implementing-AI-and-Analytics-without-the-Hype/Gray-Shellshear/p/book/9781032660301 LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/eshellshear/ Get the Book:Get 20% off at Routledge.com w/ code dspf20 Get it at AmazonWhy do we still teach people to calculate? (People I Mostly Admire podcast) -
Ready for more ideas about UX for AI and LLM applications in enterprise environments? In part 2 of my topic on UX considerations for LLMs, I explore how an LLM might be used for a fictitious use case at an insurance company—specifically, to help internal tools teams to get rapid access to primary qualitative user research. (Yes, it’s a little “meta”, and I’m also trying to nudge you with this hypothetical example—no secret!) ;-) My goal with these episodes is to share questions you might want to ask yourself such that any use of an LLM is actually contributing to a positive UX outcome Join me as I cover the implications for design, the importance of foundational data quality, the balance between creative inspiration and factual accuracy, and the never-ending discussion of how we might handle hallucinations and errors posing as “facts”—all with a UX angle. At the end, I also share a personal story where I used an LLM to help me do some shopping for my favorite product: TRIP INSURANCE! (NOT!)
Highlights/ Skip to:(1:05) I introduce a hypothetical internal LLM tool and what the goal of the tool is for the team who would use it (5:31) Improving access to primary research findings for better UX (10:19) What “quality data” means in a UX context(12:18) When LLM accuracy maybe doesn’t matter as much(14:03) How AI and LLMs are opening the door for fresh visioning work(15:38) Brian’s overall take on LLMs inside enterprise software as of right now(18:56) Final thoughts on UX design for LLMs, particularly in the enterprise(20:25) My inspiration for these 2 episodes—and how I had to use ChatGPT to help me complete a purchase on a website that could have integrated this capability right into their websiteQuotes from Today’s Episode“If we accept that the goal of most product and user experience research is to accelerate the production of quality services, products, and experiences, the question is whether or not using an LLM for these types of questions is moving the needle in that direction at all. And secondly, are the potential downsides like hallucinations and occasional fabricated findings, is that all worth it? So, this is a design for AI problem.” - Brian T. O’Neill (8:09)“What’s in our data? Can the right people change it when the LLM is wrong? The data product managers and AI leaders reading this or listening know that the not-so-secret path to the best AI is in the foundational data that the models are trained on. But what does the word *quality* mean from a product standpoint and a risk reduction one, as seen from an end-users’ perspective? Somebody who’s trying to get work done? This is a different type of quality measurement.” - Brian T. O’Neill (10:40)“When we think about fact retrieval use cases in particular, how easily can product teams—internal or otherwise—and end-users understand the confidence of responses? When responses are wrong, how easily, if at all, can users and product teams update the model’s responses? Errors in large language models may be a significant design consideration when we design probabilistic solutions, and we no longer control what exactly our products and software are going to show to users. If bad UX can include leading people down the wrong path unknowingly, then AI is kind of like the team on the other side of the tug of war that we’re playing.” - Brian T. O’Neill (11:22)“As somebody who writes a lot for my consulting business, and composes music in another, one of the hardest parts for creators can be the zero-to-one problem of getting started—the blank page—and this is a place where I think LLMs have great potential. But it also means we need to do the proper research to understand our audience, and when or where they’re doing truly generative or creative work—such that we can take a generative UX to the next level that goes beyond delivering banal and obviously derivative content.” - Brian T. O’Neill (13:31)“One thing I actually like about the hype, investment, and excitement around GenAI and LLMs in the enterprise is that there is an opportunity for organizations here to do some fresh visioning work. And this is a place that designers and user experience professionals can help data teams as we bring design into the AI space.” - Brian T. O’Neill (14:04)“If there was ever a time to do some new visioning work, I think now is one of those times. However, we need highly skilled design leaders to help facilitate this in order for this to be effective. Part of that skill is knowing who to include in exercises like this, and my perspective, one of those people, for sure, should be somebody who understands the data science side as well, not just the engineering perspective. And as I posited in my seminar that I teach, the AI and analytical data product teams probably need a fourth member. It’s a quartet and not a trio. And that quartet includes a data expert, as well as that engineering lead.” - Brian T. O’Neill (14:38)LinksPerplexity.ai: https://perplexity.ai Ideaflow: https://www.amazon.com/Ideaflow-Only-Business-Metric-Matters/dp/0593420586 My article that inspired this episode -
Let’s talk about design for AI (which more and more, I’m agreeing means GenAI to those outside the data space). The hype around GenAI and LLMs—particularly as it relates to dropping these in as features into a software application or product—seems to me, at this time, to largely be driven by FOMO rather than real value. In this “part 1” episode, I look at the importance of solid user experience design and outcome-oriented thinking when deploying LLMs into enterprise products. Challenges with immature AI UIs, the role of context, the constant game of understanding what accuracy means (and how much this matters), and the potential impact on human workers are also examined. Through a hypothetical scenario, I illustrate the complexities of using LLMs in practical applications, stressing the need for careful consideration of benchmarks and the acceptance of GenAI's risks.
I also want to note that LLMs are a very immature space in terms of UI/UX design—even if the foundation models continue to mature at a rapid pace. As such, this episode is more about the questions and mindset I would be considering when integrating LLMs into enterprise software more than a suggestion of “best practices.”
Highlights/ Skip to:
(1:15) Currently, many LLM feature initiatives seem to mostly driven by FOMO (2:45) UX Considerations for LLM-enhanced enterprise applications (5:14) Challenges with LLM UIs / user interfaces(7:24) Measuring improvement in UX outcomes with LLMs(10:36) Accuracy in LLMs and its relevance in enterprise software (11:28) Illustrating key consideration for implementing an LLM-based feature(19:00) Leadership and context in AI deployment(19:27) Determining UX benchmarks for using LLMs(20:14) The dynamic nature of LLM hallucinations and how we design for the unknown(21:16) Closing thoughts on Part 1 of designing for AI and LLMsQuotes from Today’s Episode
“While many product teams continue to race to deploy some sort of GenAI and especially LLMs into their products—particularly this is in the tech sector for commercial software companies—the general sense I’m getting is that this is still more about FOMO than anything else.” - Brian T. O’Neill (2:07)“No matter what the technology is, a good user experience design foundation starts with not doing any harm, and hopefully going beyond usable to be delightful. And adding LLM capabilities into a solution is really no different. So, we still need to have outcome-oriented thinking on both our product and design teams when deploying LLM capabilities into a solution. This is a cornerstone of good product work.” - Brian T. O’Neill (3:03)“So, challenges with LLM UIs and UXs, right, user interfaces and experiences, the most obvious challenge to me right now with large language model interfaces is that while we’ve given users tremendous flexibility in the form of a Google search-like interface, we’ve also in many cases, limited the UX of these interactions to a text conversation with a machine. We’re back to the CLI in some ways.” - Brian T. O’Neill (5:14)“Before and after we insert an LLM into a user’s workflow, we need to know what an improvement in their life or work actually means.”- Brian T. O’Neill (7:24)"If it would take the machine a few seconds to process a result versus what might take a day for a worker, what’s the role and purpose of that worker going forward? I think these are all considerations that need to be made, particularly if you’re concerned about adoption, which a lot of data product leaders are." - Brian T. O’Neill (10:17)“So, there’s no right or wrong answer here. These are all range questions, and they’re leadership questions, and context really matters. They are important to ask, particularly when we have this risk of reacting to incorrect information that looks plausible and believable because of how these LLMs tend to respond to us with a positive sheen much of the time.” - Brian T. O’Neill (19:00)Links
View Part 1 of my article on UI/UX design considerations for LLMs in enterprise applications: https://designingforanalytics.com/resources/ui-ux-design-for-enterprise-llms-use-cases-and-considerations-for-data-and-product-leaders-in-2024-part-1/ -
Ben Shneiderman is a leading figure in the field of human-computer interaction (HCI). Having founded one of the oldest HCI research centers in the country at the University of Maryland in 1983, Shneiderman has been intently studying the design of computer technology and its use by humans. Currently, Ben is a Distinguished University Professor in the Department of Computer Science at the University of Maryland and is working on a new book on human-centered artificial intelligence.
I’m so excited to welcome this expert from the field of UX and design to today’s episode of Experiencing Data! Ben and I talked a lot about the complex intersection of human-centered design and AI systems.
In our chat, we covered:
Ben's career studying human-computer interaction and computer science. (0:30)'Building a culture of safety': Creating and designing ‘safe, reliable and trustworthy’ AI systems. (3:55)'Like zoning boards': Why Ben thinks we need independent oversight of privately created AI. (12:56)'There’s no such thing as an autonomous device': Designing human control into AI systems. (18:16)A/B testing, usability testing and controlled experiments: The power of research in designing good user experiences. (21:08)Designing ‘comprehensible, predictable, and controllable’ user interfaces for explainable AI systems and why [explainable] XAI matters. (30:34)Ben's upcoming book on human-centered AI. (35:55)Resources and Links:People-Centered Internet: https://peoplecentered.net/Designing the User Interface (one of Ben’s earlier books): https://www.amazon.com/Designing-User-Interface-Human-Computer-Interaction/dp/013438038XBridging the Gap Between Ethics and Practice: https://doi.org/10.1145/3419764Partnership on AI: https://www.partnershiponai.org/AI incident database: https://www.partnershiponai.org/aiincidentdatabase/University of Maryland Human-Computer Interaction Lab: https://hcil.umd.edu/ACM Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces: https://iui.acm.org/2021/hcai_tutorial.htmlHuman-Computer Interaction Lab, University of Maryland, Annual Symposium: https://hcil.umd.edu/tutorial-human-centered-ai/Ben on Twitter: https://twitter.com/benbendc Quotes from Today’s EpisodeThe world of AI has certainly grown and blossomed — it’s the hot topic everywhere you go. It’s the hot topic among businesses around the world — governments are launching agencies to monitor AI and are also making regulatory moves and rules. … People want explainable AI; they want responsible AI; they want safe, reliable, and trustworthy AI. They want a lot of things, but they’re not always sure how to get them. The world of human-computer interaction has a long history of giving people what they want, and what they need. That blending seems like a natural way for AI to grow and to accommodate the needs of real people who have real problems. And not only the methods for studying the users, but the rules, the principles, the guidelines for making it happen. So, that’s where the action is. Of course, what we really want from AI is to make our world a better place, and that’s a tall order, but we start by talking about the things that matter — the human values: human rights, access to justice, and the dignity of every person. We want to support individual goals, a person’s sense of self-efficacy — they can do what they need to in the world, their creativity, their responsibility, and their social connections; they want to reach out to people. So, those are the sort of high aspirational goals that become the hard work of figuring out how to build it. And that’s where we want to go. - Ben (2:05)The software engineering teams creating AI systems have got real work to do. They need the right kind of workflows, engineering patterns, and Agile development methods that will work for AI. The AI world is different because it’s not just programming, but it also involves the use of data that’s used for training. The key distinction is that the data that drives the AI has to be the appropriate data, it has to be unbiased, it has to be fair, it has to be appropriate to the task at hand. And many people and many companies are coming to grips with how to manage that. This has become controversial, let’s say, in issues like granting parole, or mortgages, or hiring people. There was a controversy that Amazon ran into when its hiring algorithm favored men rather than women. There’s been bias in facial recognition algorithms, which were less accurate with people of color. That’s led to some real problems in the real world. And that’s where we have to make sure we do a much better job and the tools of human-computer interaction are very effective in building these better systems in testing and evaluating. - Ben (6:10)
Every company will tell you, “We do a really good job in checking out our AI systems.” That’s great. We want every company to do a really good job. But we also want independent oversight of somebody who’s outside the company — someone who knows the field, who’s looked at systems at other companies, and who can bring ideas and bring understanding of the dangers as well. These systems operate in an adversarial environment — there are malicious actors out there who are causing trouble. You need to understand what the dangers and threats are to the use of your system. You need to understand where the biases come from, what dangers are there, and where the software has failed in other places. You may know what happens in your company, but you can benefit by learning what happens outside your company, and that’s where independent oversight from accounting companies, from governmental regulators, and from other independent groups is so valuable. - Ben (15:04)
There’s no such thing as an autonomous device. Someone owns it; somebody’s responsible for it; someone starts it; someone stops it; someone fixes it; someone notices when it’s performing poorly. … Responsibility is a pretty key factor here. So, if there’s something going on, if a manager is deciding to use some AI system, what they need is a control panel, let them know: what’s happening? What’s it doing? What’s going wrong and what’s going right? That kind of supervisory autonomy is what I talk about, not full machine autonomy that’s hidden away and you never see it because that’s just head-in-the-sand thinking. What you want to do is expose the operation of a system, and where possible, give the stakeholders who are responsible for performance the right kind of control panel and the right kind of data. … Feedback is the breakfast of champions. And companies know that. They want to be able to measure the success stories, and they want to know their failures, so they can reduce them. The continuous improvement mantra is alive and well. We do want to keep tracking what’s going on and make sure it gets better. Every quarter. - Ben (19:41)
Google has had some issues regarding hiring in the AI research area, and so has Facebook with elections and the way that algorithms tend to become echo chambers. These companies — and this is not through heavy research — probably have the heaviest investment of user experience professionals within data science organizations. They have UX, ML-UX people, UX for AI people, they’re at the cutting edge. I see a lot more generalist designers in most other companies. Most of them are rather unfamiliar with any of this or what the ramifications are on the design work that they’re doing. But even these largest companies that have, probably, the biggest penetration into the most number of people out there are getting some of this really important stuff wrong. - Brian (26:36)
Explainability is a competitive advantage for an AI system. People will gravitate towards systems that they understand, that they feel in control of, that are predictable. So, the big discussion about explainable AI focuses on what’s usually called post-hoc explanations, and the Shapley, and LIME, and other methods are usually tied to the post-hoc approach.That is, you use an AI model, you get a result and you say, “What happened?” Why was I denied a parole, or a mortgage, or a job? At that point, you want to get an explanation. Now, that idea is appealing, but I’m afraid I haven’t seen too many success stories of that working. … I’ve been diving through this for years now, and I’ve been looking for examples of good user interfaces of post-hoc explanations. It took me a long time till I found one. The culture of AI model-building would be much bolstered by an infusion of thinking about what the user interface will be for these explanations. And even the DARPA’s XAI—Explainable AI—project, which has 11 projects within it—has not really grappled with this in a good way about designing what it’s going to look like. Show it to me. … There is another way. And the strategy is basically prevention. Let’s prevent the user from getting confused and so they don’t have to request an explanation. We walk them along, let the user walk through the step—this is like Amazon checkout process, seven-step process—and you know what’s happened in each step, you can go back, you can explore, you can change things in each part of it. It’s also what TurboTax does so well, in really complicated situations, and walks you through it. … You want to have a comprehensible, predictable, and controllable user interface that makes sense as you walk through each step. - Ben (31:13)
-
Wait, I’m talking to a head of data management at a tech company? Why!? Well, today I'm joined by Malcolm Hawker to get his perspective around data products and what he’s seeing out in the wild as Head of Data Management at Profisee. Why Malcolm? Malcolm was a former head of product in prior roles, and for several years, I’ve enjoyed Malcolm’s musings on LinkedIn about the value of a product-oriented approach to ML and analytics. We had a chance to meet at CDOIQ in 2023 as well and he went on my “need to do an episode” list!
According to Malcom, empathy is the secret to addressing key UX questions that ensure adoption and business value. He also emphasizes the need for data experts to develop business skills so that they're seen as equals by their customers. During our chat, Malcolm stresses the benefits of a product- and customer-centric approach to data products and what data professionals can learn approaching problem solving with a product orientation.
Highlights/ Skip to:Malcolm’s definition of a data product (2:10)Understanding your customers’ needs is the first step toward quantifying the benefits of your data product (6:34)How product makers can gain access to users to build more successful products (11:36) Answering the UX question to get past the adoption stage and provide business value (16:03)Data experts must develop business expertise if they want to be seen as equals by potential customers (20:07)What people really mean by “data culture" (23:02)Malcolm’s data product journey and his changing perspective (32:05)Using empathy to provide a better UX in design and data (39:24)Avoiding the death of data science by becoming more product-driven (46:23)Where the majority of data professionals currently land on their view of product management for data products (48:15)Quotes from Today’s Episode“My definition of a data product is something that is built by a data and analytics team that solves a specific customer problem that the customer would otherwise be willing to pay for. That’s it.” - Malcolm Hawker (3:42)“You need to observe how your customer uses data to make better decisions, optimize a business process, or to mitigate business risk. You need to know how your customers operate at a very, very intimate level, arguably, as well as they know how their business processes operate.” - Malcolm Hawker (7:36)“So, be a problem solver. Be collaborative. Be somebody who is eager to help make your customers’ lives easier. You hear "no" when people think that you’re a burden. You start to hear more “yeses” when people think that you are actually invested in helping make their lives easier.” - Malcolm Hawker (12:42)“We [data professionals] put data on a pedestal. We develop this mindset that the data matters more—as much or maybe even more than the business processes, and that is not true. We would not exist if it were not for the business. Hard stop.” - Malcolm Hawker (17:07)“I hate to say it, I think a lot of this data stuff should kind of feel invisible in that way, too. It’s like this invisible ally that you’re not thinking about the dashboard; you just access the information as part of your natural workflow when you need insights on making a decision, or a status check that you’re on track with whatever your goal was. You’re not really going out of mode.” - Brian O’Neill (24:59)“But you know, data people are basically librarians. We want to put things into classifications that are logical and work forwards and backwards, right? And in the product world, sometimes they just don’t, where you can have something be a product and be a material to a subsequent product.” - Malcolm Hawker (37:57)“So, the broader point here is just more of a mindset shift. And you know, maybe these things aren’t necessarily a bad thing, but how do we become a little more product- and customer-driven so that we avoid situations where everybody thinks what we’re doing is a time waster?” - Malcolm Hawker (48:00)LinksProfisee: https://profisee.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/malhawker/ CDO Matters: https://profisee.com/cdo-matters-live-with-malcolm-hawker/ -
Welcome to another curated, Promoted Episode of Experiencing Data!
In episode 144, Shashank Garg, Co-Founder and CEO of Infocepts, joins me to explore whether all this discussion of data products out on the web actually has substance and is worth the perceived extra effort. Do we always need to take a product approach for ML and analytics initiatives? Shashank dives into how Infocepts approaches the creation of data solutions that are designed to be actionable within specific business workflows—and as I often do, I started out by asking Shashank how he and Infocepts define the term “data product.” We discuss a few real-world applications Infocepts has built, and the measurable impact of these data products—as well as some of the challenges they’ve faced that your team might as well. Skill sets also came up; who does design? Who takes ownership of the product/value side? And of course, we touch a bit on GenAI.
Highlights/ Skip to
Shashank gives his definition of data products (01:24)We tackle the challenges of user adoption in data products (04:29)We discuss the crucial role of integrating actionable insights into data products for enhanced decision-making (05:47)Shashank shares insights on the evolution of data products from concept to practical integration (10:35)We explore the challenges and strategies in designing user-centric data products (12:30)I ask Shashank about typical environments and challenges when starting new data product consultations (15:57)Shashank explains how Infocepts incorporates AI into their data solutions (18:55)We discuss the importance of understanding user personas and engaging with actual users (25:06)Shashank describes the roles involved in data product development’s ideation and brainstorming stages (32:20)The issue of proxy users not truly representing end-users in data product design is examined (35:47)We consider how organizations are adopting a product-oriented approach to their data strategies (39:48)Shashank and I delve into the implications of GenAI and other AI technologies on product orientation and user adoption (43:47)Closing thoughts (51:00)Quotes from Today’s Episode
“Data products, at least to us at Infocepts, refers to a way of thinking about and organizing your data in a way so that it drives consumption, and most importantly, actions.” - Shashank Garg (1:44)“The way I see it is [that] the role of a DPM (data product manager)—whether they have the title or not—is benefits creation. You need to be responsible for benefits, not for outputs. The outputs have to create benefits or it doesn’t count. Game over” - Brian O’Neill (10:07)We talk about bridging the gap between the worlds of business and analytics... There's a huge gap between the perception of users and the tech leaders who are producing it." - Shashank Garg (17:37)“IT leaders often limit their roles to provisioning their secure data, and then they rely on businesses to be able to generate insights and take actions. Sometimes this handoff works, and sometimes it doesn’t because of quality governance.” - Shashank Garg (23:02)“Data is the kind of field where people can react very, very quickly to what’s wrong.” - Shashank Garg (29:44)“It’s much easier to get to a good prototype if we know what the inputs to a prototype are, which include data about the people who are going to use the solution, their usage scenarios, use cases, attitudes, beliefs…all these kinds of things.” - Brian O’Neill (31:49)“For data, you need a separate person, and then for designing, you need a separate person, and for analysis, you need a separate person—the more you can combine, I don’t think you can create super-humans who can do all three, four disciplines, but at least two disciplines and can appreciate the third one that makes it easier.” - Shashank Garg (39:20)“When we think of AI, we’re all talking about multiple different delivery methods here. I think AI is starting to become GenAI to a lot of non-data people. It’s like their—everything is GenAI.” - Brian O'Neill (43:48)Links
Infocepts website: https://www.infocepts.ai/Shashank Garg on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/shashankgarg/ Top 5 Data & AI initiatives for business success: https://www.infocepts.ai/downloads/top-5-data-and-ai-initiatives-to-drive-business-growth-in-2024-beyond/ -
Welcome back! In today's solo episode, I share the top five struggles that enterprise SAAS leaders have in the analytics/insight/decision support space that most frequently leads them to think they have a UI/UX design problem that has to be addressed. A lot of today's episode will talk about "slow creep," unaddressed design problems that gradually build up over time and begin to impact both UX and your revenue negatively. I will also share 20 UI and UX design problems I often see (even if clients do not!) that, when left unaddressed, may create sales friction, adoption problems, churn, or unhappy end users. If you work at a software company or are directly monetizing an ML or analytical data product, this episode is for you!
Highlights/ Skip to
I discuss how specific UI/UX design problems can significantly impact business performance (02:51)I discuss five common reasons why enterprise software leaders typically reach out for help (04:39)The 20 common symptoms I've observed in client engagements that indicate the need for professional UI/UX intervention or training (13:22)The dangers of adding too many features or customization and how it can overwhelm users (16:00)The issues of integrating AI into user interfaces and UXs without proper design thinking (30:08)I encourage listeners to apply the insights shared to improve their data products (48:02)Quotes from Today’s Episode“One of the problems with bad design is that some of it we can see and some of it we can't — unless you know what you're looking for." - Brian O’Neill (02:23)“Design is usually not top of mind for an enterprise software product, especially one in the machine learning and analytics space. However, if you have human users, even enterprise ones, their tolerance for bad software is much lower today than in the past.” Brian O’Neill - (13:04)“Early on when you're trying to get product market fit, you can't be everything for everyone. You need to be an A+ experience for the person you're trying to satisfy.” -Brian O’Neill (15:39)“Often when I see customization, it is mostly used as a crutch for not making real product strategy and design decisions.” - Brian O’Neill (16:04) "Customization of data and dashboard products may be more of a tax than a benefit. In the marketing copy, customization sounds like a benefit...until you actually go in and try to do it. It puts the mental effort to design a good solution on the user." - Brian O’Neill (16:26)“We need to think strategically when implementing Gen AI or just AI in general into the product UX because it won’t automatically help drive sales or increase business value.” - Brian O’Neill (20:50) “A lot of times our analytics and machine learning tools… are insight decision support products. They're supposed to be rooted in facts and data, but when it comes to designing these products, there's not a whole lot of data and facts that are actually informing the product design choices.” Brian O’Neill - (30:37)“If your IP is that special, but also complex, it needs the proper UI/UX design treatment so that the value can be surfaced in such a way someone is willing to pay for it if not also find it indispensable and delightful.” - Brian O’Neill (45:02)LinksThe (5) big reasons AI/ML and analytics product leaders invest in UI/UX design help: https://designingforanalytics.com/resources/the-5-big-reasons-ai-ml-and-analytics-product-leaders-invest-in-ui-ux-design-help/ Subscribe for free insights on designing useful, high-value enterprise ML and analytical data products: https://designingforanalytics.com/list Access my free frameworks, guides, and additional reading for SAAS leaders on designing high-value ML and analytical data products: https://designingforanalytics.com/resources Need help getting your product’s design/UX on track—so you can see more sales, less churn, and higher user adoption? Schedule a free 60-minute Discovery Call with me and I’ll give you my read on your situation and my recommendations to get ahead:https://designingforanalytics.com/services/ -
Welcome to a special edition of Experiencing Data. This episode is the audio capture from a live Crowdcast video webinar I gave on April 26th, 2024 where I conducted a mini UI/UX design audit of a new podcast analytics service that Chris Hill, CEO of Humblepod, is working on to help podcast hosts grow their show. Humblepod is also the team-behind-the-scenes of Experiencing Data, and Chris had asked me to take a look at his new “Listener Lifecycle” tool to see if we could find ways to improve the UX and visualizations in the tool, how we might productize this MVP in the future, and how improving the tool’s design might help Chris help his prospective podcast clients learn how their listener data could help them grow their listenership and “true fans.” On a personal note, it was fun to talk to Chris on the show given we speak every week: Humblepod has been my trusted resource for audio mixing, transcription, and show note summarizing for probably over 100 of the most recent episodes of Experiencing Data. It was also fun to do a “live recording” with an audience—and we did answer questions in the full video version. (If you missed the invite, join my Insights mailing list to get notified of future free webinars).
To watch the full audio and video recording on Crowdcast, free, head over to: https://www.crowdcast.io/c/podcast-analytics-ui-ux-design
Highlights/ Skip to:Chris talks about using data to improve podcasts and his approach to podcast numbers (03:06)Chris introduces the Listener Lifecycle model which informed the dashboard design (08:17)Chris and I discuss the importance of labeling and terminology in analytics UIs (11:00)We discuss designing for practical use of analytics dashboards to provide actionable insights (17:05)We discuss the challenges podcast hosts face in understanding and utilizing data effectively and how design might help (21:44)I discuss how my CED UX framework for advanced analytics applications helps to facilitate actionable insights (24:37)I highlight the importance of presenting data effectively and in a way that centers to user needs (28:50)I express challenges users may have with podcast rankings and the reliability of data sources (34:24) Chris and I discuss tailoring data reports to meet the specific needs of clients (37:14)Quotes from Today’s Episode“The irony for me as someone who has a podcast about machine learning and analytics and design is that I basically never look at my analytics.” - Brian O’Neill (01:14)“The problem that I have found in podcasting is that the number that everybody uses to gauge whether a podcast is good or not is the download number…But there’s a lot of other factors in a podcast that can tell you how successful it’s going to be…where you can pull levers to…grow your show, or engage more with an audience.” - Chris Hill (03:20)“I have a framework for user experience design for analytics called CED, which stands for Conclusions, Evidence, Data… The basic idea is really simple: lead your analytic service with conclusions.”- Brian O’Neill (24:37)“Where the eyes glaze over is when tools are mostly about evidence generators, and we just give everybody the evidence, but there’s no actual analysis about how [this is] helping me improve my life or my business. It’s just evidence. I need someone to put that together.” - Brian O’Neill (25:23)“Sometimes the data doesn’t provide enough of a conclusion about what to do…This is where your opinion starts to matter” - Brian O’Neill (26:07)“It sounds like a benefit, but drilling down for most people into analytics stuff is usually a tax unless you’re an analyst.” - Brian O’Neill (27:39)“Where’s the source of this data, and who decided what these numbers are? Because so much of this stuff…is not shared. As someone who’s in this space, it’s not even that it’s confusing. It’s more like, you got to distill this down for me.” - Brian O’Neill (34:57)“Your clients are probably going to glaze over at this level of data because it’s not helping them make any decision about what to change.”- Brian O’Neill (37:53)LinksWatch the original Crowdcast video recording of this episodeBrian’s CED UX Framework for Advanced Analytics SolutionsJoin Brian’s Insights mailing list -
In this week's episode of Experiencing Data, I'm joined by Duncan Milne, a Director, Data Investment & Product Management at the Royal Bank of Canada (RBC). Today, Duncan (who is also a member of the DPLC) gives a preview of his upcoming webinar on April 24, 2024 entitled, “Is that Data Product Worth Building? Estimating Economic Value…Before You Build It!” Duncan shares his experience of implementing a product mindset within RBC's Chief Data Office, and he explains some of the challenges, successes, and insights gained along the way. He emphasizes the critical role of understanding user needs and evaluating the economic impact of data products—before they are built. Duncan was gracious to let us peek inside and see a transformation that is currently in progress and I’m excited to check out his webinar this month!
Highlights/ Skip to:
I introduce Duncan Milne from RBC (00:00)Duncan outlines the Chief Data Office's function at RBC (01:01)We discuss data products and how they are used to improve business process (04:05)The genesis behind RBC's move towards a product-centric approach in handling data, highlighting initial challenges and strategies for fostering a product mindset (07:26)Duncan discusses developing a framework to guide the lifecycle of data products at RBC (09:29)Duncan addresses initial resistance and adaptation strategies for engaging teams in a new product-centric methodology (12:04)The scaling challenges of applying a product mindset across a large organization like RBC (22:02)Insights into the framework for evaluating and prioritizing data product ideas based on their desirability, usability, feasibility, and viability. (26:30)Measuring success and value in data product management (30:45)Duncan explores process mapping challenges in banking (34:13)Duncan shares creating specialized training for data product management at RBC (36:39)Duncan offers advice and closing thoughts on data product management (41:38)Quotes from Today’s Episode“We think about data products as anything that solves a problem using data... it's helping someone do something they already do or want to do faster and better using data." - Duncan Milne (04:29)“The transition to data product management involves overcoming initial resistance by demonstrating the tangible value of this approach." - Duncan Milne (08:38)"You have to want to show up and do this kind of work [adopting a product mindset in data product management]…even if you do a product the right way, it doesn’t always work, right? The thing you make may not be desirable, it may not be as usable as it needs to be. It can be technically right and still fail. It’s not a guarantee, it’s just a better way of working.” - Brian T. O’Neill (15:03)“[Product management]... it's like baking versus cooking. Baking is a science... cooking is much more flexible. It’s about... did we produce a benefit for users? Did we produce an economic benefit? ...It’s a multivariate problem... a lot of it is experimentation and figuring out what works." - Brian T. O'Neill (23:03)"The easy thing to measure [in product management] is did you follow the process or not? That is not the point of product management at all. It's about delivering benefits to the stakeholders and to the customer." - Brian O'Neill (25:16)“Data product is not something that is set in stone... You can leverage learnings from a more traditional product approach, but don’t be afraid to improvise." - Duncan Milne (41:38)“Data products are fundamentally different from digital products, so even the traditional approach to product management in that space doesn’t necessarily work within the data products construct.” - Duncan Milne (41:55)“There is no textbook for data product management; the field is still being developed…don’t be afraid to create your own answer if what exists out there doesn’t necessarily work within your context.”- Duncan Milne (42:17)LinksDuncan’s Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/duncanwmilne/?originalSubdomain=ca -
This week on Experiencing Data, I chat with a new kindred spirit! Recently, I connected with Thabata Romanowski—better known as "T from Data Rocks NZ"—to discuss her experience applying UX design principles to modern analytical data products and dashboards. T walks us through her experience working as a data analyst in the mining sector, sharing the journey of how these experiences laid the foundation for her transition to data visualization. Now, she specializes in transforming complex, industry-specific data sets into intuitive, user-friendly visual representations, and addresses the challenges faced by the analytics teams she supports through her design business. T and I tackle common misconceptions about design in the analytics field, discuss how we communicate and educate non-designers on applying UX design principles to their dashboard and application design work, and address the problem with "pretty charts." We also explore some of the core ideas in T's Design Manifesto, including principles like being purposeful, context-sensitive, collaborative, and humanistic—all aimed at increasing user adoption and business value by improving UX.
Highlights/ Skip to:
I welcome T from Data Rocks NZ onto the show (00:00)T's transition from mining to leading an information design and data visualization consultancy. (01:43)T discusses the critical role of clear communication in data design solutions. (03:39)We address the misconceptions around the role of design in data analytics. (06:54) T explains the importance of journey mapping in understanding users' needs. (15:25)We discuss the challenges of accurately capturing end-user needs. (19:00) T and I discuss the importance of talking directly to end-users when developing data products. (25:56) T shares her 'I like, I wish, I wonder' method for eliciting genuine user feedback. (33:03)T discusses her Data Design Manifesto for creating purposeful, context-aware, collaborative, and human-centered design principles in data. (36:37)We wrap up the conversation and share ways to connect with T. (40:49)Quotes from Today’s Episode"It's not so much that people…don't know what design is, it's more that they understand it differently from what it can actually do..." - T from Data Rocks NZ (06:59)"I think [misconception about design in technology] is rooted mainly in the fact that data has been very tied to IT teams, to technology teams, and they’re not always up to what design actually does.” - T from Data Rocks NZ (07:42) “If you strip design of function, it becomes art. So, it’s not art… it’s about being functional and being useful in helping people.” - T from Data Rocks NZ (09:06)"It’s not that people don’t know, really, that the word design exists, or that design applies to analytics and whatnot; it’s more that they have this misunderstanding that it’s about making things look a certain way, when in fact... It’s about function. It’s about helping people do stuff better." - T from Data Rocks NZ (09:19)“Journey Mapping means that you have to talk to people... Data is an inherently human thing. It is something that we create ourselves. So, it’s biased from the start. You can’t fully remove the human from the data" - T from Data Rocks NZ (15:36) “The biggest part of your data product success…happens outside of your technology and outside of your actual analysis. It’s defining who your audience is, what the context of this audience is, and to which purpose do they need that product. - T from Data Rocks NZ (19:08)“[In UX research], a tight, empowered product team needs regular exposure to end customers; there’s nothing that can replace that." - Brian O'Neill (25:58)“You have two sides [end-users and data team] that are frustrated with the same thing. The side who asked wasn’t really sure what to ask. And then the data team gets frustrated because the users don’t know what they want…Nobody really understood what the problem is. There’s a lot of assumptions happening there. And this is one of the hardest things to let go.” - T from Data Rocks NZ (29:38)“No piece of data product exists in isolation, so understanding what people do with it… is really important.” - T from Data Rocks NZ (38:51)LinksDesign Matters Newsletter: https://buttondown.email/datarocksnz Website: https://www.datarocks.co.nz/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/datarocksnz/BlueSky: https://bsky.app/profile/datarocksnz.bsky.socialMastodon: https://me.dm/@datarocksnz -
This week on Experiencing Data, something new as promised at the beginning of the year. Today, I’m exploring the world of embedded analytics with Zalak Trivedi from Sigma Computing—and this is also the first approved Promoted Episode on the podcast. In today’s episode, Zalak shares his journey as the product lead for Sigma’s embedded analytics and reporting solution which seeks to accelerate and simplify the deployment of decision support dashboards to their SAAS companies’ customers. Right there, we have the first challenge that Zalak was willing to dig into with me: designing a platform UX when we have multiple stakeholder and user types. In Sigma’s case, this means Sigma’s buyers, the developers that work at these SAAS companies to integrate Sigma into their products, and then the actual customers of these SAAS companies who will be the final end users of the resulting dashboards. also discuss the challenges of creating products that serve both beginners and experts and how AI is being used in the BI industry.
Highlights/ Skip to:
I introduce Zalak Trivedi from Sigma Computing onto the show (03:15)Zalak shares his journey leading the vision for embedded analytics at Sigma and explains what Sigma looks like when implemented into a customer’s SAAS product . (03:54)Zalak and I discuss the challenge of integrating Sigma's analytics into various companies' software, since they need to account for a variety of stakeholders. (09:53)We explore Sigma's team approach to user experience with product management, design, and technical writing (15:14)Zalak reveals how Sigma leverages telemetry to understand and improve user interactions with their products (19:54)Zalak outlines why Sigma is a faster and more supportive alternative to building your own analytics (27:21)We cover data monetization, specifically looking at how SAAS companies can monetize analytics and insights (32:05)Zalak highlights how Sigma is integratingAI into their BI solution (36:15)Zalak share his customers' current pain points and interests (40:25) We wrap up with final thoughts and ways to connect with Zalak and learn more about Sigma (49:41) Quotes from Today’s Episode"Something I’m really excited about personally that we are working on is [moving] beyond analytics to help customers build entire data applications within Sigma. This is something we are really excited about as a company, and marching towards [achieving] this year." - Zalak Trivedi (04:04)“The whole point of an embedded analytics application is that it should look and feel exactly like the application it’s embedded in, and the workflow should be seamless.” - Zalak Trivedi (09:29) “We [at Sigma] had to switch the way that we were thinking about personas. It was not just about the analysts or the data teams; it was more about how do we give the right tools to the [SAAS] product managers and developers to embed Sigma into their product.” - Zalak Trivedi (11:30) “You can’t not have a design, and you can’t not have a user experience. There’s always an experience with every tool, solution, product that we use, whether it emerged organically as a byproduct, or it was intentionally created through knowledge data... it was intentional” - Brian O’Neill (14:52) “If we find that [in] certain user experiences,people are tripping up, and they’re not able to complete an entire workflow, we flag that, and then we work with the product managers, or [with] our customers essentially, and figure out how we can actually simplify these experiences.” - Zalak Trivedi (20:54)“We were able to convince many small to medium businesses and startups to sign up with Sigma. The success they experienced after embedding Sigma was tremendous. Many of our customers managed to monetize their existing data within weeks, or at most, a couple of months, with lean development teams of two to three developers and a few business-side personnel, generating seven-figure income streams from that.” - Zalak Trivedi (32:05)“At Sigma, our stance is, let’s not just add AI for the sake of adding AI. Let’s really identify [where] in the entire user journey does the intelligence really lie, and where are the different friction points, and let’s enhance those experiences.” - Zalak Trivedi (37:38) “Every time [we at Sigma Computing] think about a new feature or functionality, we have to ensure it works for both the first-degree persona and the second-degree persona, and consider how it will be viewed by these different personas, because that is not the primary persona for which the foundation of the product was built." - Zalak Trivedi (48:08)LinksSigma Computing: https://sigmacomputing.com
Email: [email protected]
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/trivedizalak/
Sigma Computing Embedded: https://sigmacomputing.com/embedded
About Promoted Episodes on Experiencing Data: https://designingforanalytics.com/promoted
-
In this episode of Experiencing Data, I speak with Ellen Chisa, Partner at BoldStart Ventures, about what she’s seeing in the venture capital space around AI-driven products and companies—particularly with all the new GenAI capabilities that have emerged in the last year. Ellen and I first met when we were both engaged in travel tech startups in Boston over a decade ago, so it was great to get her current perspective being on the “other side” of products and companies working as a VC. Ellen draws on her experience in product management and design to discuss how AI could democratize software creation and streamline backend coding, design integration, and analytics. We also delve into her work at Dark and the future prospects for developer tools and SaaS platforms. Given Ellen’s background in product management, human-centered design, and now VC, I thought she would have a lot to share—and she did!
Highlights/ Skip to:I introduce the show and my guest, Ellen Chisa (00:00)Ellen discusses her transition from product and design to venture capital with BoldStart Ventures. (01:15)Ellen notes a shift from initial AI prototypes to more refined products, focusing on building and testing with minimal data. (03:22)Ellen mentions BoldStart Ventures' focus on early-stage companies providing developer and data tooling for businesses. (07:00)Ellen discusses what she learned from her time at Dark and Lola about narrowing target user groups for technology products (11:54)Ellen's Insights into the importance of user experience is in product design and the process venture capitalists endure to make sure it meets user needs (15:50)Ellen gives us her take on the impact of AI on creating new opportunities for data tools and engineering solutions, (20:00)Ellen and I explore the future of user interfaces, and how AI tools could enhance UI/UX for end users. (25:28)Closing remarks and the best way to find Ellen on online (32:07)Quotes from Today’s Episode“It's a really interesting time in the venture market because on top of the Gen AI wave, we obviously had the macroeconomic shift. And so we've seen a lot of people are saying the companies that come out now are going to be great companies because they're a little bit more capital-constrained from the beginning, typically, and they'll grow more thoughtfully and really be thinking about how do they build an efficient business.”- Ellen Chisa (03: 22) “We have this big technological shift around AI-enabled companies, and I think one of the things I’ve seen is, if you think back to a year ago, we saw a lot of early prototyping, and so there were like a couple of use cases that came up again and again.”-Ellen Chisa (3:42)“I don't think I've heard many pitches from founders who consider themselves data scientists first. We definitely get some from ML engineers and people who think about data architecture, for sure..”- Ellen Chisa (05:06) “I still prefer GUI interfaces to voice or text usually, but I think that might be an uncanny valley sort of thing where if you think of people who didn’t have technology growing up, they’re more comfortable with the more human interaction, and then you get, like, a chunk of people who are digital natives who prefer it.”- Ellen Chisa (24:51)[Citing some excellent Boston-area restaurants!] “The Arc browser just shipped a bunch of new functionality, where instead of opening a bunch of tabs, you can say, “Open the recipe pages for Oleana and Sarma,” and it just opens both of them, and so it’s like multiple search queries at once.” - Ellen Chisa (27:22)“The AI wave of technology biases towards people who already have products [in the market] and have existing datasets, and so I think everyone [at tech companies] is getting this big, top-down mandate from their executive team, like, ‘Oh, hey, you have to do something with AI now.’”- Ellen Chisa (28:37)“I think it’s hard to really grasp what an LLM is until you do a fair amount of experimentation on your own. The experience of asking ChatGPT a simple search question compared to the experience of trying to train it to do something specific for you are quite different experiences. Even beyond that, there’s a tool called superwhisper that I like that you can take audio content and end up with transcripts, but you can give it prompts to change your transcripts as you’re going. So, you can record something, and it will give you a different output if you say you’re recording an email compared to [if] you’re recording a journal entry compared to [if] you’re recording the transcript for a podcast.”- Ellen Chisa (30:11)LinksBoldstart ventures: https://boldstart.vc/LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ellenchisa/Personal website: https://ellenchisa.comEmail: [email protected] -
This week, I'm chatting with Karen Meppen, a founding member of the Data Product Leadership Community and a Data Product Architect and Client Services Director at Hakkoda. Today, we're tackling the difficult topic of developing data products in situations where a product-oriented culture and data infrastructures may still be emerging or “at odds” with a human-centered approach. Karen brings extensive experience and a strong belief in how to effectively negotiate the early stages of data maturity. Together we look at the major hurdles that businesses encounter when trying to properly exploit data products, as well as the necessity of leadership support and strategy alignment in these initiatives. Karen's insights offer a roadmap for those seeking to adopt a product and UX-driven methodology when significant tech or cultural hurdles may exist.
Highlights/ Skip to:
I Introduce Karen Meppen and the challenges of dealing with data products in places where the data and tech aren't quite there yet (00:00)Karen shares her thoughts on what it's like working with "immature data" (02:27)Karen breaks down what a data product actually is (04:20)Karen and I discuss why having executive buy-in is crucial for moving forward with data products (07:48)The sometimes fuzzy definition of "data products." (12:09)Karen defines “shadow data teams” and explains how they sometimes conflict with tech teams (17:35)How Karen identifies the nature of each team to overcome common hurdles of connecting tech teams with business units (18:47)How she navigates conversations with tech leaders who think they already understand the requirements of business users (22:48)Using design prototypes and design reviews with different teams to make sure everyone is on the same page about UX (24:00)Karen shares stories from earlier in her career that led her to embrace human-centered design to ensure data products actually meet user needs (28:29)We reflect on our chat about UX, data products, and the “producty” approach to ML and analytics solutions (42:11) Quotes from Today’s Episode"It’s not really fair to get really excited about what we hear about or see on LinkedIn, at conferences, etc. We get excited about the shiny things, and then want to go straight to it when [our] organization [may not be ] ready to do that, for a lot of reasons." - Karen Meppen (03:00)"If you do not have support from leadership and this is not something [they are] passionate about, you probably aren’t a great candidate for pursuing data products as a way of working." - Karen Meppen (08:30)"Requirements are just friendly lies." - Karen, quoting Brian about how data teams need to interpret stakeholder requests (13:27)"The greatest challenge that we have in technology is not technology, it’s the people, and understanding how we’re using the technology to meet our needs." - Karen Meppen (24:04)"You can’t automate something that you haven’t defined. For example, if you don’t have clarity on your tagging approach for your PII, or just the nature of all the metadata that you’re capturing for your data assets and what it means or how it’s handled—to make it good, then how could you possibly automate any of this that hasn’t been defined?" - Karen Meppen (38:35)"Nothing upsets an end-user more than lifting-and-shifting an existing report with the same problems it had in a new solution that now they’ve never used before." - Karen Meppen (40:13)“Early maturity may look different in many ways depending upon the nature of business you’re doing, the structure of your data team, and how it interacts with folks.” (42:46) Links Data Product Leadership Community https://designingforanalytics.com/community/Karen Meppen on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/karen--m/Hakkōda, Karen's company, for more insights on data products and services:https://hakkoda.io/ -
This week I’m chatting with Caroline Zimmerman, Director of Data Products and Strategy at Profusion. Caroline shares her journey through the school of hard knocks that led to her discovery that incorporating more extensive UX research into the data product design process improves outcomes. We explore the complicated nature of discovering and building a better design process, how to engage end users so they actually make time for research, and why understanding how to navigate interdepartmental politics is necessary in the world of data and product design. Caroline reveals the pivotal moment that changed her approach to data product design, as well as her learnings from evolving data products with the users as their needs and business strategies change. Lastly, Caroline and I explore what the future of data product leadership looks like and Caroline shares why there's never been a better time to work in data.
Highlights/ Skip to:
Intros and Caroline describes how she learned crucial lessons on building data products the hard way (00:36)The fundamental moment that helped Caroline to realize that she needed to find a different way to uncover user needs (03:51)How working with great UX researchers influenced Caroline’s approach to building data products (08:31)Why Caroline feels that exploring the ‘why’ is foundational to designing a data product that gets adopted (10:25)Caroline’s experience building a data model for a client and what she learned from that experience when the client’s business model changed (14:34)How Caroline addresses the challenge of end users not making time for user research (18:00)A high-level overview of the UX research process when Caroline’s team starts working with a new client (22:28)The biggest challenges that Caroline faces as a Director of Data Products, and why data products require the ability to navigate company politics and interests (29:58)Caroline describes the nuances of working with different stakeholder personas (35:15)Why data teams need to embrace a more human-led approach to designing data products and focus less on metrics and the technical aspects (38:10)Caroline’s closing thoughts on what she’d like to share with other data leaders and how you can connect with her (40:48)Quotes from Today’s Episode“When I was first starting out, I thought that you could essentially take notes on what someone was asking for, go off and build it to their exact specs, and be successful. And it turns out that you can build something to exact specs and suffer from poor adoption and just not be solving problems because I did it as a wish fulfillment, laundry-list exercise rather than really thinking through user needs.” — Caroline Zimmerman (01:11)“People want a thing. They’re paying for a thing, right? And so, just really having that reflex to try to gently come back to that why and spending sufficient time exploring it before going into solution build, even when people are under a lot of deadline pressure and are paying you to deliver a thing [is the most important element of designing a data product].” – Caroline Zimmerman (11:53)“A data product evolves because user needs change, business models change, and business priorities change, and we need to evolve with it. It’s not like you got it right once, and then you’re good for life. At all.” – Caroline Zimmerman (17:48)“I continue to have lots to learn about stakeholder management and understanding the interplay between what the organization needs to be successful, but also, organizations are made up of people with personal interests, and you need to understand both.” – Caroline Zimmerman (30:18)“Data products are built in a political context. And just being aware of that context is important.” – Caroline Zimmerman (32:33)“I think that data, maybe more than any other function, is transversal. I think data brings up politics because, especially with larger organizations, there are those departmental and team silos. And the whole thing about data is it cuts through those because it touches all the different teams. It touches all the different processes. And so in order to build great data products, you have to be navigating that political context to understand how to get things done transversely in organizations where most stuff gets done vertically.” – Caroline Zimmerman (34:37)“Data leadership positions are data product expertise roles. And I think that often it’s been more technical people that have advanced into those roles. If you follow the LinkedIn-verse in data, it’s very much on every data leader’s mind at the moment: how do you articulate benefits to your CEO and your board and try to do that before it’s too late? So, I’d say that’s really the main thing and that there’s just never been a better time to be a data product person.” – Caroline Zimmerman (37:16)LinksProfusion: https://profusion.com/Caroline Zimmerman LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/caroline-zimmerman-4a531640/Nick Zervoudis LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/nzervoudis/Email: mailto:[email protected] - Laat meer zien
