Yesterday, I wrote about the timely topic of artificial intelligence (AI), and what it means to be a technology that’s built to be AI-First, as opposed to AI-Later. My next post in this series digs into the “last mile” problems of AI that too many companies ignore, and which are critical to making your solutions sticky.
How do you get regular business users to depend on your predictions, even though they won’t understand all of the science that went into calculating them? You want them to trust the predictions, to understand how to best leverage them to drive value, and to change their workflows to depend on them.
This is the last mile problem. It is a very hard problem — and it’s a product problem, not a data scientist problem. Having an army of data scientists isn’t going to make this problem better. In fact, it may make it worse, as data scientists typically want to focus on modeling, which may lead to over-investing in that aspect versus thinking about the end-to-end user experience.
To solve last mile problems, vendors need to successfully tackle three critical components:
1) Getting “predictive everywhere” with integrations
It’s very important to understand where the user needs their predictions — and this may not be in just one system, but many. We had to provide open APIs and build direct integrations for Marketo, Eloqua, Salesforce, Microsoft Dynamics, HubSpot, Pardot, Google Analytics and Microsoft Power BI.
Integrating into these systems is not fun. Each one has it own challenges: how to push predictions into records without locking out users who are editing at the same time; how to pull all the behavioral activity data out to determine when a prospect will be ready to buy (without exceeding the API limits); how to populate predictions across millions of records in minutes not hours; etc. These are hard software and systems problems (99% perspiration). In fact, the integration work likely consumed more time than our modeling work.
This is what it means to be truly “predictive everywhere.” Some companies like Salesforce are touting this idea, but it’s closed to their stack. For specific solutions like predictive lead scoring, this falls apart quickly, because most mid-market and enterprise companies run lead scoring in marketing automation systems like Marketo, Eloqua and Hubspot.
Last mile here means you’re investing more in integrating predictions into other systems than in your own user experience or portal. You go to where the user already is — that’s how you get sticky — not by trying to create new behavior for them to do on your own site (even if you can make your site look way prettier and function better). What matters is stickiness. Period.
2) Building trust
Trust is paramount to achieving success with predictive solutions. It doesn’t matter if your model works if the user doesn’t act on it or believe in it. A key area to establish trust around is the data, and specifically the external data (i.e. signals not in the CRM or marketing automation platforms — a big trick we employ to improve our models and to de-noise dirty CRM data).
Sometimes, customers want external signals that aren’t just useful for improving model performance. Signals like whether a business offers a Free Trial on their website might also play an important operational role in helping a company take different actions for specific types of leads or contacts. For example, with Infer’s profiling and predictive scoring solutions, they could filter and define a segment, predict the winners from that group, and prioritize personalized sales and marketing programs to target those prospects.
In addition to exposing our tens of thousands of external signals, another way we build trust is by making it easy and flexible to customize our solution to the unique needs and expectations of each customer. Some companies may need multiple models, by region / market / product line (when there is enough training data) or “lenses” (essentially, normalizing another model that has more data) when there isn’t enough data. They then need a system that guides them on how to determine those solutions and tradeoffs. Some companies care about the timing of deals; they may have particular cycle times they want to optimize for or they may want their predictions to bias towards higher deal size, higher LTV, etc.
Some customers want the models to update as they close more deals. This is known as retraining the model, but over retraining could result in bad performance. For example, say you’re continuously and automatically retraining with every new example, but the customer was in the middle of a messy data migration process. It would have been better to wait until that migration completed to avoid incorrectly skewing the model for that period of time. What you need is model monitoring, which gauges live performance and notices dips or opportunities to improve performance when there’s new data. The platform then alerts the vendor and the customer, and finally results in a proper retraining.
Additionally, keep in mind that not all predictions will be accurate, and the customer will sometimes see these errors. It’s important to provide them with options to report such feedback via an active process that actually results in improvements in the models. Customers expect their vendor to be deep on details like these. Remember, for many people AI still feels like voodoo, science fiction and too blackbox-like (despite the industry’s best efforts to visualize and explain models). Customers want transparent controls that support a variety of configurations in order to believe, and thus, operationalize a machine-learned model.
3) Making predictive disappear with proven use cases
Finally, let’s talk about use cases and making predictive disappear in a product. This is a crucial dimension and a clear sign of a mature AI-First company. There are a lot of early startups selling AI as their product to business users. However, most business users don’t want or should want AI — they want a solution to a problem. AI is not a solution, but an optimization technique. At Infer, we support three primary applications (or use cases) to help sales and marketing teams: Qualification, Nurturing and Net New. We provide workflows that you can install in your automation systems to leverage our predictive tech and make each of these use cases more intelligent. However, we could position and sell these apps without even mentioning the word predictive because it’s all about the business value.
In our space, most VPs of Sales or Marketing don’t have Ph.Ds in computer science or statistics. They want more revenue, not a machine learning tutorial. Our pitch then goes something like this …
“Here are three apps for driving more revenue. Here’s how each app looks in our portal and here are the workflows in action in your automation system… here are the ROI visualizations for each app… let’s run through a bunch of customer references and success studies for the apps that you care about. Oh, and our apps happen to leverage a variety predictive models that we’ll expose to you too if you want to go deep on those.”
Predictive is core to the value but not what we lead with. Where we are different is in the lengths we go to guide our customers with real-world playbooks, to formulate and vet custom models that best serve their individual use cases, and to help them establish sticky workflows that drive consistent success. We initially sell customers one application, and hopefully, over time, the depth of our use cases will impress them so much that we’ll cross-sell them into all three apps. This approach has been huge for us. It’s also been a major differentiator — we achieved our best-ever competitive win rate this year (despite 2016 being the most competitive) by talking less about predictive.
Vendors that are overdoing the predictive and AI talk are missing the point and don’t realize that data science is a behind-the-scenes optimization. Don’t get me wrong, it’s sexy tech, it’s a fun category to be in (certainly helps with engineering recruiting) and it makes for great marketing buzz, but that positioning is not terribly helpful in the later stages of a deal or for driving customer success.
The focus needs to be on the value. When I hear companies just talking about predictive, and not about value or use cases / applications, I think they’re playing a dangerous game for themselves as well as for the market. It hurts them as that’s not something you can differentiate on any more (remember, anyone can model). Sure, your model may be better, but the end buyer can’t tell the difference or may not be willing (or understand how) to run a rigorous evaluation to see those differences.
In my last post in this series, I’ll explore how AI got so overhyped, whether the giants will really go deep in this technology, and when we’re likely to see mass AI adoption.