Cal Watson

Do you know the biggest con being pulled on CIOs right now? They are all being sold "AI assistants" that don't do anything. Zero. Nothing. No automation. If you are a leader, imagine if your real world assistant didn't do anything for you, but simply kept sending you info on how to do things yourself. Allowing an employee to file a ticket is NOT an automation Routing an employee to a portal is NOT an automation Sending an employee a summary is NOT an automation Telling an employee when their next meeting is NOT an automation Getting an employee access to an application IS automation Booking time off for an employee IS automation Approving a purchase request IS automation Resetting an employee MFA IS automation Booking a meeting on a calendar IS automation Spinning up a new virtual machine IS automation I think we should start expecting AI assistants to do things, not just find things.

155

22 Comments

It's Thursday, the week's been good. So why not put a target on my back, side, front & wherever else by combining a winning trifecta of contention & post about: manual testing, AI & the future of QA. Jokes aside (and having let eyes roll and then come back to centre) , in all seriousness, it is a serious topic. And one which people are asking us (and others). And which I see being asked online. So I think it's fair game to comment. First off - this isn't about the topic of "manual QA" vs "functional tester". That's done plenty elsewhere. I've done it too, frankly. Nor will it contain anything about AI taking over the world, replacing all jobs completely and making QA nothing but a computer led function. What it is about is: are we reaching a point at which testing which can be automated, but instead which is being done by people pressing keys on the keyboard (the manual in manual testing that people refer to), for that testing is AI coming to make it so that all that can be automated will be automated. Now I don't have stats on the percentage of automatable tests that are currently covered by manual testing. But it sure isn't 0% and it sure isn't 100%. In fact, if I take that Dwayne Johnson meme I saw doing the rounds where he asks "what do test automators do" and the girl in the back of the car (in the meme) replies "manual testing", then it suggests not all automation is yet automated. And it's not. So, the future of QA question? Will AI take over question? What will become of manual testing question? Notwithstanding I work for an AI test automation platform where (let's be honest) it's in my interest to propose that AI will enable more and more people to automate, I am also a sensible human being (I think), where I for one will say: if AI can't even determine how many r's there are in Strawberry (Google it), I know AI can't yet be given the keys to the car and be sent off on a drive alone. Read: it's not autonomous. But I do know for a fact that the uptick we're seeing in organisations saying "with platforms like you, we can automate more", it does say that whether it's our platform or another with whatever form of AI under the hood, AI is making a difference in test automation and, in turn, QA. So the biggest question of all: if test automation without AI couldn't increase coverage enough meaning that "manual testing" had to step in and take up the slack, then if test automation with AI can increase coverage (to what % remains to be seen en masse), what does that mean for the state of "manual testing" in automation moving forward? Does it mean less manual testers? Does it mean manual testers who wanted to get on with less-repetitive, less-automatable, more exotic testing, but couldn't because they were dragged into automation, will they move onto those other tasks? I don't know. It's the question I'm asking though.

9

3 Comments

Sending out the #batsignal to my network! I'm currently researching Agency/Enterprise IT strategies, with a focus on COTs SW strategies. I'm looking for insights from those who work in Software Asset Management Office's or CIO offices, or anyone who might have resources to share. Your help and expertise would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance! ****************************EDIT************************* Adding more context based on Florence Kasule question: I am looking for "the process" how different agencies treat/consider enterprise license as well as cots purchases that are not enterprise. If there is an agency playbook, manual, procedure for all of this I would love to see it. - What is the approval process to create a new enterprise license? - What is the approval process to procure COTS not on an enterprise license? - What requirements do different agencies have for using GWACs, MACs, ect...? -How is all of this managed: centralized SAM/IT office, CIO shop, portfolio's, program office level, etc... - How does CIO and Procurement office's collaborate in this space: where are the lines of authority and ownership? - How much of this occurs under system integrator contracts as an ODC? #procuremenati #CIO #enterpriseIT Charles Worthington Eric Hysen Dana Chisnell Traci Walker Florence Kasule Michael Palmer

10

13 Comments

To all Sales and RevOps Leaders... What are you most stressed out about right now? Chances are it's one or all of these 3 things: ⏰ Territory, Quota, Comp Plans for 2025 ⏰ Forecasting Accuracy that is below par (90%) ⏰ 2025 Capacity Planning If any of these resonate - let me know in the comments. Or reach out as maybe I can help take these off the table for you. #fractional #revops #planning

2

2-weeks into a successful POC, this client ramped from 40 to 440 instances. THE POC SUCCESS CRITERIA: 1️⃣ Cost Savings 2️⃣ No Service Disruption 3️⃣ Easy to use. THE POC TEST RESULTS: ✅ Reporting 68% Savings ✅ Zero Issues (Even went on PTO) ✅ Easy Management via Terraform 🤔Think they’ll buy❓ 😀 Wouldn’t you❓ LET US HELP YOU SAVE, TOO: https://lnkd.in/dsibkiKE #ec2 #aws #kubernetes #k8s #costoptimization #finops #gcp #googlecloud #SpotVM #GoogleCloudConsulting Xosphere FinOps Foundation

25

2 Comments

How does RevOps evolve from Systems Admin to Strategic Advisor? - How do you “get a seat at the table?” - How do you move from taking tickets to leading projects? The first step: - 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁 “𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀” - 𝗦𝘁𝗼𝗽 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 “𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀” What’s the difference? 𝗥𝗲𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀 - We run reports - We build dashboards - We create slick slide decks - We then present the numbers - And then we wait for a response - What do leaders think of these numbers? - What do THEY recommend we do about it? - What other reports do they want us to run? - What initiatives do they want us to prioritize? 𝗠𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗡𝗲𝘄𝘀 - We start with a question - Are we on track to targets? - Where are we performing well? - Where are we not performing well? - Why do we think this might be happening? - What does the data tell us needs improved most? - What can RevOps do to help the team improve here? 𝗪𝗵𝗲𝗻 𝗺𝗮𝗸𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗻𝗲𝘄𝘀, 𝘄𝗲 𝗮𝗿𝗲: - Putting the numbers in context - Identifying specific opportunities - Outlining an actual plan to tackle them We take the onus of thinking through this off of leadership. What would you add here? 🤔 More on HOW to do this in in tomorrow’s 📰 𝙍𝙚𝙫𝙊𝙥𝙨 𝙒𝙚𝙚𝙠𝙡𝙮 📰 Subscribe to get it here: https://bit.ly/49RCm0h ✌️

46

13 Comments

Read it.

7

As I hesd out this morning, random thought: Do you like tying your shoes every time or just slipping them on and going? 👟 The same idea applies to SaaS—configure it every time or set it up to maintain and slip right in when needed. Efficiency or constant manual process everytime—which one would you prefer? #SaaS #ProductDevelopment #Efficiency #Automation #StartupLife #HealthcareMeetsFinTech #softwaredevelopment

3

When I worked at StorageTek, upper management decided we needed a SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. They appointed a team to develop one. That team mostly consisted of manager types who did very little coding, though there were some very senior programmers.  Since this was the mid-1990s before agile methodologies were popular, you probably can guess what they came up with…a *very* strict waterfall model. First, managers met with the customer to develop Requirements. Once these were signed by both parties, they became a contract signed in blood. No changes of any kind were allowed. After that, the managers and senior developers got together to develop the design document. This listed all the modules that would be needed, and specified how they would be written in excruciating detail. Everything was listed: entry points, exit points, every other module it called and every module that called it. That was when we worker bees got to see it. Unlike the requirements, the design could be changed, but only by writing a long, detailed amendment to the design document that specified the change. This, of course, had to be reviewed and approved by the design committee. Once these documents were written and designed, coding was simply a mechanical process of implementing the design. But if you found the design was wrong, you had to stop development while you got the design amended. Schedule slips, anyone? Then, of course, the customer *always* came back with new requirements. Software Engineering management invariably said no, and pointed to the signed requirements. But at StorageTek, hardware was king. Software was just an expensive burden they had to tolerate in order to sell their cool devices, so hardware always won. That meant more delays as the requirements document was updated, then the design documents, then the software we already had developed. Of course, we then took heat for being behind schedule. Once we had the software developed, we went through weeks of integration hell and then testing. We had bugs of course, which meant changing the software. But first, we had to get approval for changes to the design document. But by this time, we were so far behind that management let that slide. As a result, we ended up with binders full of design documents that didn’t match the software, so they were useless. This is a perfect illustration of why the waterfall model was and is a terrible idea. Requirements change. It is impossible for humans to completely specify the design beforehand. Necessary changes need to happen quickly. All these are not allowed by a strict waterfall process. One humorous note. After the grand and glorious software process committee was complete, management presented them with a large, octagonal plaque that listed their names and achievements. This was hung prominently on a wall at the entrance to our area. Everyone agreed it was appropriate that the plaque was in the shape of a STOP sign.

193

9 Comments

If you are in the process of buying TA Technology be curious and a little selfish! I'm serious, ask the questions, move past the shiny cool stuff, and keep in perspective YOUR goal. ▶ Questions I would ask in a demo as a buyer are: Can you demonstrate how my team would use this to complete x activity?  Based on what you showed me, what products accomplish my core need? What did you show that was extra? Have you configured your solution to do X? How many clients do you have that mirror our use case?  Can you show how you measure our activities in your solution?   Can you show how your team observes our activity in your solution to run a QBR? ▶ Post Demo questions before the next demo:  You stated you have X client that mirrors our use case, can I speak with them? Can you provide a referenceable client using the same product(s) my team would use? That’s different from above? Can you provide a client that just finished implementation in the last 3 months? Do you have good partnerships with (insert my tech stack required integrations here) Are there any new integrations that need to be built to produce our outcomes or have you built this integration before? Can you provide a business case that shows an outcome for X scenario? These questions aren’t meant to be difficult—they’re critical to ensure a provider can deliver the ROI and outcomes you need. Remember: Selecting technology is more than a choice; it’s a strategy that impacts your team’s success. Most times, technology selection is the responsibility of a TA leader and so are those outcomes. Be intentional as you go into these demos and decisions.

25

8 Comments

Doing Discovery – The Importance of “Why” Questions Prospect asks, “Can your software do X?”   Vendor replies, “Yes, absolutely.”     I can’t tell you how many times that brief conversation has occurred without any followup questions from the vendor! What’s missing? Asking “WHY?”   Far too often vendors execute discovery by simply asking questions about the prospect’s needs, without asking any clarifying questions. This is a huge lost opportunity!   Let’s review the conversation again, this time with a more engaged vendor:   Prospect asks, “Can your software do X?”   Vendor replies, “Yes, absolutely – but tell me, WHY is this important for you?”   Prospect responds, “Oh, it’s really difficult to do today. It’s largely a manual process that takes hours and it is a key requirement for us.”   “I understand,” says the vendor, “How often do you have to do this – and what else does it impact…?”   The conversation continues with two intriguing outcomes: The vendor gains a MUCH richer understanding of the prospect’s situation along with the associated value of a solution. The prospect feels the vendor has much richer understanding of their situation, making the prospect much more comfortable about working with that vendor. “Why” questions are delightful triggers. Don’t miss these opportunities in YOUR discovery dialogs! You’ll find many more tips and practices in Doing Discovery! https://lnkd.in/g28PXx55

This is excellent advice. There are no shortage of great ideas from the couch. But they don’t get you anywhere. Ideas are not the challenge. It’s the execution and change management along the way. 💫

1

When I was at Salesforce, they doubled spend on new customers in the first 12 months. New customer acquisition is so tough right now. Nothing is more critical than retaining and growing existing customers. Here are some of the plays I learned at Salesforce: 1. Product Whitespace - Run a report for each Account Mgr - Show products purchased by account - Show products not purchased by account - Account Mgr can now call down accordingly 2. Stakeholder Whitespace - Run a report for each Account Mgr - Show key stakeholder roles by account - Show who we’ve contacted and who not - Show who we’ve met and who we haven’t - Account Mgr can now call down accordingly 3. Monitor Customer Health - Create a Customer Health Score - Scoring their usage of the product - Integrate this score into Salesforce - Run a report showing unhealthy accounts - AM can then call down on these accounts - And work to get them healthy before upselling 4. Find Expansion Signals in Product - Look for potential expansion signals - Example: CS Cases => Premiere Support - Example: Lots of data => Extra Data Storage - Example: Lots of emails => Sell marketing tools - Create reports AM can use to call down accounts 5. Leverage Renewal Event - Meet every single CFO ahead of Renewal - Ask if them they would like “Optimal Pricing” - Very few of them will say they want to pay extra - Ask to review their spending across the company - Get sponsorship to talk to other key stakeholders - Sell bigger package at renewal w/ bigger discounts These are just a handful of plays that worked for me. What would you add? 🤔 More on expansion here: https://bit.ly/4ad3iHy ✌️

63

16 Comments

Headed back to the Chi after 2 days in Austin with 300+ GTM leaders. Here's the CliffsNotes: 1) It's easier than ever to spin up a new company with minimal resources that can take on incumbents who have extreme technical and personnel debt. AI changes the way companies are built and will ultimately greatly reduce the moat enterprise software used to have in most markets. 2) It's harder than ever to cut through the noise and find PMF for said newer products because there are so many new companies being spun up (see #1). 3) It's going to be fascinating to see how tech stacks evolve given all the capabilities of new technology. Many tools have the ability to add features quickly that provide new revenue streams. My hunch is that partnerships are going to become harder given the ability to build new functionality internally vs. in the past where that was extremely costly. 4) It's an employers market out there. Select roles are open but employers have the pick of the litter and can afford to wait to find the perfect candidate. This is so extreme that some leaders shared they dont want to post their roles publicly because they would have to sift through an immense amount of applications so they are choosing to source candidates proactively through their network. 5) It's becoming more evident that leaders (particularly in GTM) see value in hybrid or in-person settings. The sentiment is that its just too hard to train and collaborate remotely, particularly for those that are earlier in their careers. 6) Companies really need help with their GTM strategy and Operations. They are turning to seasoned Rev Ops pros (or consultants like Anne Pao - great seeing you!) to help drive their process forward. New tooling, training, and strategy is needed to compete in this era of tighter budgets and more purchasing scrutiny. 7) Catching up with people IRL is still super energizing. Breaking bread (well biscuits cause we were in TX) with Trinity Nguyen💎, Bethany Stachenfeld, Meitar Rita Landau, and Deb Das + grabbing a coffee with Cory Pitt, Mary Browning, and Downtown Kenny Browne was great. 8) Having a bulkhead row all to yourself on the flight home doesn't suck. 'till next time Austin!

72

31 Comments

Right about now is when Finance goes looking for reporting to come up with FY25 goals so they tap their head of marketing and their head of sales....... Who then taps their operational teams (rev/sales/marketing ops)....... Who then scrambles to pull historical data off models that aren't right or aren't there.... Because their finance team has only approved budget for "revenue-generating activities or technology." So in return receives bad data for funnel metrics and pipeline (likely pulled by the different teams in a silo) to create goals that aren't realistic, unattainable, and wrong. Meanwhile, the GTM operating teams lost a week(s) of productivity and are again behind on their roadmap. Moral of the story:  Invest in the foundation and data for GTM operations and educate finance on why it is important (even to them!)

32

2 Comments

#Auth66 Day 49 - As we head on down this path towards the finish line - I am going to do a better job of planning these out as the last little bit has been quite impromptu. Maybe that's ok but I'd like to talk with more intentionality for the rest of this journey and today - by request - I'm going to talk about how to know there is a right fit or a wrong fit with clients and how you handle it to bring it into realignment or when to make the difficult decision to go your separate ways. #auth66challenge #rightfit #msp https://lnkd.in/ev_pUYi2

9

5 Comments

That large consulting firm courting your implementation, ya they probably don't have the resources they claim they do. They've got an evergreen rec on their site that they use to capture resumes in case a large deal (like the one you're negotiating) closes. It's one way to run a program, and it can work. But it also explains why none of the consultants assigned to your project actually understand what the end goal is or their own internal processes.

68

15 Comments