Tech Talks Daily

How do you turn powerful AI technology into something customers actually trust, adopt, and use? Recording live from Qlik Connect, I sat down with Mary Kern, Vice President of Analytics Product Go-To-Market at Qlik, to explore one of the most overlooked challenges in enterprise AI today. Not building the technology, but making it real for the people expected to use it every day. Because while AI innovation is moving at incredible speed, many organizations are still struggling with a much more practical question. How do you move from exciting product announcements and pilot projects to real adoption, measurable outcomes, and business value? In our conversation, Mary shares how Qlik is approaching that challenge by shifting the focus away from shiny features and toward outcomes that matter. We discuss why agentic AI is creating so much excitement, why customers are often much closer to operationalizing it than they realize, and how years of investment in data quality, governance, and analytics are now becoming the foundation for what comes next. We also talk about the growing importance of trusted data and context, especially as AI moves from generating insights to influencing decisions and actions. Mary explains why simply adding a large language model on top of existing systems rarely works, and why organizations need to think more carefully about how AI is trained, governed, and integrated into the environments where people already work. There is also a refreshingly honest conversation around cost, experimentation, and imperfection. Mary makes the case that organizations should start now, even if the data is not perfect, because using AI often reveals where the real gaps are and what needs to improve next. So as businesses look ahead to the next 12 months, what will separate those who successfully scale AI from those still stuck in pilot mode? And are we spending too much time talking about the technology, and not enough time understanding how people will actually use it? Join me for a candid conversation from the heart of Qlik Connect, and let me know your thoughts. Is your organization closing the gap between AI capability and real adoption, or is that still the biggest challenge?

What if the reason most AI projects fail has less to do with the technology and more to do with how the work itself is designed? Recording live from Qlik Connect, I sat down with Nick Magnuson, Head of AI at Qlik, for a conversation about the gap between AI ambition and operational reality. Because while many organizations are still focused on models, tools, and the race to deploy new capabilities, the real challenge often sits somewhere much less glamorous. Workflow design, trusted data, and making sure AI fits the way a business actually runs. Nick brings more than two decades of experience in machine learning and predictive analytics, and in this conversation, he shares why so many AI initiatives fail before they ever create value. His view is refreshingly direct. Most failures are not technology failures at all. They are workflow failures, where teams try to force AI into the business without first understanding the outcomes they are trying to achieve. We also explore the rise of agentic AI and what it means when systems move from generating insights to taking action. Nick explains why governance becomes even more important in that world, how organizations can balance speed with control, and why trusted data has to move beyond being "good enough for reporting" to becoming reliable enough for decisions and automated execution. There is also a strong discussion around openness, portability, and the growing risk of vendor lock-in. As enterprises build more complex AI ecosystems, flexibility is becoming a strategic advantage, especially for organizations trying to scale without creating expensive dependencies they will regret later. For mid-market businesses with limited resources, Nick also shares a practical path to production. A reminder that operationalizing AI does not require massive teams or unlimited budgets, but it does require clarity, discipline, and a focus on the right problems first. So as the next wave of enterprise AI moves from experimentation to execution, what will separate the organizations that scale successfully from those still stuck in pilot mode? And are we asking the wrong questions by focusing on more AI, instead of better AI? Join me for a thoughtful conversation from the heart of Qlik Connect, and let me know your view. Is workflow design the missing piece in your AI strategy?

What does it really take to turn AI from a flashy experiment into something that creates measurable business value? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I sat down with Angela Virtu from American University's Kogod School of Business to talk about what business leaders should actually be paying attention to as AI moves into a new phase in 2026. This conversation goes far beyond the usual headlines about bigger models and faster tools. Angela brings a rare mix of academic leadership and hands-on startup experience, which means she understands both the technical side of AI and the hard business questions around adoption, trust, and ROI. One of the most interesting parts of our discussion centered on how American University's Kogod School of Business became one of the first AI-first business schools. Angela shared how that shift was never really about chasing hype. It was about recognizing a real change in the workplace and preparing students for jobs, workflows, and expectations that are already being shaped by AI. From faculty training to culture change, she explained how transformation only works when leadership is willing to support experimentation and accept that some ideas will fail before the right ones take hold. We also spent time unpacking where businesses stand right now in the AI adoption cycle. After years of pilots and proof-of-concept projects, many companies are under pressure to show results. Angela offered a refreshingly honest take on why so many AI projects stall and why adoption alone is a weak metric. Instead, she argued that companies need to tie AI initiatives to clear business problems and existing KPIs. Whether that means customer support resolution times, employee productivity, or operational efficiency, the point is simple. AI needs to earn its place. Another thread running through this episode is governance. As AI becomes more deeply embedded inside organizations, the conversation is shifting toward oversight, accountability, and trust. Angela explains why the strongest governance models are often shared across the company rather than locked inside one team. She also discusses the need for closed systems, stronger communication, and honest disclosure when businesses use AI in customer-facing environments. That part of the conversation feels especially timely as more brands try to balance innovation with customer expectations. We also looked ahead at what is coming next, from model orchestration and vertical AI to the rise of physical world models and even the possibility of AI agents becoming a customer audience in their own right. It is one of those episodes that will give business leaders, technologists, educators, and curious listeners plenty to think about. If you are trying to understand where AI strategy is headed in 2026, and how to separate real value from noise, this episode is for you. What did you make of Angela's views on governance, ROI, and the next phase of AI adoption, and where do you think businesses are still getting it wrong? Share your thoughts with me. Useful Links: Connect with Angela VirtuKogod School of Business Visit the Sponsors of Tech Talks Network and learn more about the NordLayer Browser.

What actually separates AI that delivers real value from AI that never makes it past the demo stage? Recording live from Qlik Connect, I sat down with Ryan Welsh, Field CTO of Generative AI at Qlik, to get a grounded, practitioner-led view of what it really takes to make AI work inside a business. While the industry has spent the past few years racing to experiment, build, and deploy new capabilities, many organizations are still struggling to turn that progress into capabilities people use every day. In our conversation, Ryan cuts through the noise and explains why so many AI initiatives fail. Not because the models aren't powerful enough, but because they're not designed to fit into real workflows. He shares why context is far more than just a buzzword and how getting the right data, in the right place, at the right time, enables AI to deliver meaningful outcomes. We also explore the growing shift toward agentic AI and the responsibilities that come with it. From designing systems that can act autonomously while remaining under control to understanding where humans need to stay involved, Ryan offers a practical view of how organizations can move forward without introducing unnecessary risk. There's also a refreshing honesty around where we are right now. After a wave of investment and expectation, many companies struggled to see immediate value from AI. But as Ryan explains, that period is changing, with more organizations finding ways to scale what works and move beyond isolated use cases. So, as businesses look ahead, what does it really take to move from experimentation to execution? And are we focusing too much on building more AI rather than the right AI for how our organizations actually operate? Join me for a candid conversation from the heart of Qlik Connect, and let me know your thoughts. Are you seeing AI deliver real outcomes in your business, or is it still stuck in the demo phase?

What does it really take to move beyond AI experimentation and build something a business can rely on? Recording live from Qlik Connect, I sat down with James Fisher, Chief Strategy Officer at Qlik, to unpack what's actually changing as AI moves from hype into real-world execution. Because while many organizations have spent the past few years exploring use cases and running pilots, the harder challenge is now in front of them. Turning that early momentum into something scalable, governed, and aligned with business outcomes. In our conversation, James offers a candid view of where companies are getting this wrong. He describes a period of what he calls "AI madness," where everything became a potential use case, but very little translated into measurable value. Now, he sees a shift toward more focused, outcome-driven thinking, where success depends on understanding the user, the data, and the specific problem being solved. One of the most thought-provoking moments comes when James challenges the idea of having an AI strategy at all. Instead, he argues that AI should be embedded directly into the broader business strategy, shaping how decisions are made, how processes operate, and how organizations compete. We also explore the realities that many businesses are only just beginning to face. The complexity of data access and governance, the growing pressure around cost and sustainability, and the risks of vendor lock-in in a rapidly evolving AI ecosystem. James shares why openness and flexibility are becoming critical, and why some of the same patterns seen in previous technology waves are starting to repeat themselves. So as organizations look ahead to the next 12 to 24 months, what will separate those that successfully operationalize AI from those that remain stuck in cycles of experimentation? And are we focusing too much on the technology, and not enough on the business problems it's meant to solve? Join me for a grounded and strategic conversation from the heart of Qlik Connect, and let me know your thoughts. Are you still experimenting with AI, or are you starting to embed it into the core of how your business operates? Useful Links Connect with Mike Capone on LinkedInLearn more about QlikFollow on Twitter,FacebookLinkedIn Visit the May Sponsors of Tech Talks Network and learn more about the NordLayer Browser.

What happens when your AI agents start making decisions faster than your security team can even see them? In this episode, I sit down with Sunil Agrawal, Chief Information Security Officer at Glean, to unpack a shift already underway in enterprises. With predictions that 40 percent of enterprise applications will include autonomous AI agents by the end of 2026, we are moving from human-led workflows to machine-to-machine interactions at a scale most organizations are not fully prepared for. Sunil brings a rare perspective, blending more than 25 years of cybersecurity experience with an inventor's mindset shaped by over 40 patents. What stood out to me in our conversation is how quickly the traditional security model is becoming outdated. As he explained, "autonomous agents break those assumptions because they operate across tools, varying permissions and data sources with alarming speed and autonomy." This creates what he calls the "autonomy gap," in which the CIO's drive for speed collides with the CISO's need for visibility and control. We explore how that tension is playing out in real organizations today, and why so many are already falling behind. Nearly half of businesses still lack the AI-specific controls needed to prevent untraceable incidents, and the risks are not always what you might expect. Sunil argues that the first major rogue-agent incident is unlikely to be a malicious attack. Instead, it will come from confusion: a well-intentioned system taking the wrong action in the wrong context, with consequences that ripple across the business. The conversation then turns practical. Sunil breaks down his AWARE framework, a structured way to introduce real-time guardrails that evaluate intent, context, and risk before an agent takes action. Rather than relying on static policies, this approach focuses on continuous runtime enforcement, where systems are constantly assessed based on behavior rather than assumptions. What I found particularly valuable is how this moves beyond theory into something leaders can act on today. From starting with tightly scoped use cases to investing in full observability, this episode offers a clear roadmap for balancing innovation with accountability. As Sunil put it, organizations that succeed will not be the ones that move fastest, but the ones that prove trust at scale. So how do you embrace the productivity gains of autonomous AI without opening the door to invisible risk, and are your current security models ready for a world where the "user" is no longer human? Useful Links Connect with Sunil Agrawal on LinkedInLearn more about GleanFollow Glean on LinkedIn Visit the Tech Talks Network Sponsor NordLayer Browser

What does it actually take to move AI from experimentation into something a business can depend on every single day? Recording live from the show floor at Qlik Connect in Florida, I sat down with Qlik CEO Mike Capone to cut through the noise and get to the reality behind enterprise AI in 2026. Because while the headlines are still dominated by rapid innovation and new capabilities, many organizations are quietly facing a different challenge. They are struggling to turn AI ambition into measurable outcomes. In our conversation, Mike shares what he is hearing from customers around the world and why so many companies remain stuck in cycles of pilots and proof of concepts. We talk about the growing pressure from boards and leadership teams to move faster, and why that urgency is often leading to what he calls a "ready, fire, aim" approach that fails to deliver real business value. We also explore one of the biggest themes emerging at Qlik Connect this year. The shift toward agentic AI. But rather than focusing on the hype, Mike breaks down what this actually means inside a real enterprise workflow, where insights are not just generated but turned into decisions and actions. He also explains why getting the data foundation right is no longer optional, and how poor data quality can quickly turn AI from an opportunity into a risk. From data trust and governance to the challenges of operating across increasingly complex regulatory environments, this episode offers a clear view of what it takes to build AI systems that are reliable, scalable, and grounded in real business context. So as organizations look ahead to the next 12 to 24 months, what will separate those that successfully operationalize AI from those that remain stuck in pilot mode? And are we focusing too much on building more AI, rather than building better AI? Join me for a candid conversation from the heart of Qlik Connect, and let me know where you stand on this shift. Are you seeing real progress, or are the same challenges holding things back?

How are brands supposed to deliver AI-powered customer experiences when their data is scattered across systems that were never designed to work together? In this episode, I sit down with Peter Bell, VP EMEA Marketing at Twilio, to unpack one of the most important AI topics that still does not get enough attention outside technical circles, Model Context Protocol, or MCP. While many conversations about AI remain stuck on model hype, chatbots, and the latest product launch, Peter brings the discussion back to something far more practical. If businesses want AI to deliver real outcomes in customer service, marketing, and brand engagement, they first need a reliable way to connect large language models to the right data, in the right systems, with the right controls in place. That is why this conversation matters. Peter explains how MCP could become one of the biggest unlocks for enterprise AI by creating a standard way for LLMs to access information across fragmented tools like CRM platforms, marketing systems, and other business applications. Instead of forcing every company to build custom integrations from scratch, MCP creates a more consistent path for connecting models to the context they need. For me, that is where this episode really earns its place, because it moves the AI conversation away from vague ambition and toward the plumbing that actually makes useful AI possible. We also talk about why first-party data remains so important, especially as businesses try to create customer experiences that feel seamless, personal, and trustworthy. Peter makes the point that public models may be useful for general knowledge, but brands cannot rely on generic internet-trained systems to solve precise business problems. If you want AI to support travel bookings, customer service, or commerce journeys, you need specific data, strong governance, and a much clearer understanding of the problem you are trying to solve. That sounds obvious, but it is still where many AI projects fall apart. Another part of our conversation focuses on trust, which feels especially relevant right now. From scams and impersonation to consumer fatigue and poor automation, brands are under pressure to move faster without losing credibility. Peter shares how Twilio is thinking about branded calling, RCS, conversational AI, and voice experiences that feel modern without becoming intrusive or robotic. We also discuss why too many companies still automate too broadly, too quickly, without defining the actual use case first. What I enjoyed most here was Peter's balanced view. He is optimistic about where AI is heading, but he is also realistic about the work still required to get there. This is not a conversation about AI magic. It is about data access, governance, trust, brand experience, and the standards that may quietly shape the next phase of AI adoption far more than the flashy headlines. So if you have been hearing more people mention MCP and wondering why it matters, or if you are trying to understand what needs to happen before enterprise AI can move from promise to practical value, this episode will give you plenty to think about. Is Model Context Protocol the missing layer that finally helps AI connect with the real world of business data?

What does it actually take to make AI work inside a real business, where messy data, human judgment, and operational risk all collide? In this episode, I sit down with Matt Fitzpatrick, CEO of Invisible Technologies, to talk about why the biggest barrier to enterprise AI is not model quality, it is everything that comes before the model ever gets to work. Since stepping into the CEO role in January 2025, Matt has moved quickly, raising $100 million and expanding Invisible's footprint across major cities including New York, San Francisco, DC, Austin, London, and Poland. But this conversation is far less about headlines and far more about what happens in the trenches of AI adoption, where companies are trying to move from pilots and PowerPoint promises to systems that actually deliver results. A huge theme throughout our discussion is data readiness. Matt makes a compelling case that most businesses are still dealing with fragmented systems, inconsistent records, and information spread across disconnected tools. That reality makes it incredibly hard to deploy AI in a way that creates trust and value. We talk about SwissGear, where Invisible used its Neuron platform to clean and structure 750 scattered tables in just one week, a task that could have taken a large engineering team months or longer. We also discuss why that kind of work matters so much, because once the data foundation is fixed, companies can start making better decisions on forecasting, operations, and planning with a level of confidence that simply was not there before. We also spend time on Invisible's human-in-the-loop approach, which I think will resonate with a lot of listeners trying to cut through the noise around job displacement and agentic AI. Matt argues that the real opportunity is not replacing people, but giving them better tools to handle repetitive work while preserving room for human expertise, judgment, and oversight. He shares examples from commercial credit workflows, healthcare, and sports analytics, including a fascinating story about the Charlotte Hornets using AI to turn broadcast footage into detailed tracking data. What stood out to me was how practical his perspective felt. This was not theory. It was about building systems around how organizations actually work, rather than expecting businesses to reshape themselves around a generic AI product. Another part of the conversation that deserves attention is governance. As boards rush to understand agentic AI, Matt explains why trust, standards, and responsible deployment are now driving buying decisions just as much as raw capability. We talk about privacy in healthcare, the risks of scaling autonomous systems without mature governance, and why enterprise adoption still trails consumer AI by a wide margin. That gap between excitement and execution may be one of the most important stories in AI right now. If you are wondering why so many AI projects never make it into production, or what it will take for enterprise AI to finally deliver on its promise, this episode is packed with insight. It is a conversation about data, deployment, governance, and the role humans will continue to play as AI becomes part of everyday business operations. After listening, I would love to know where you stand, is the future of AI really about bigger models, or is it about making AI fit the messy reality of how work gets done?

In this episode, I speak with Bert Van Hoof, CEO of Willow, about how AI is starting to reshape the built world in ways that go far beyond smart dashboards and efficiency reports. Bert brings decades of experience from the front lines of digital infrastructure, including his time at Microsoft, where he helped create Azure Digital Twins and Smart Places. Today at Willow, he is focused on a much bigger idea, using AI to help buildings, campuses, hospitals, airports, and other complex environments operate with greater intelligence, lower waste, and better outcomes for the people who rely on them every day. One of the most interesting parts of our conversation is how Bert explains the shift from passive building software to active management systems. For years, many digital twin and smart building tools were good at showing what had already happened. But operators do not need another screen full of charts. They need systems that can connect live data, static records, spatial context, and operational history to help them make better decisions in real time. That is where Willow comes in, creating a digital foundation where AI can reason across everything from HVAC and air quality to occupancy, refrigeration, maintenance history, and even energy usage patterns. We also unpack why this matters right now. Energy costs remain under pressure, sustainability goals are getting harder to ignore, and many organizations are still stuck with fragmented systems that do not talk to each other. Bert shares how AI can help move building teams from reactive maintenance to predictive performance, spotting issues earlier, cutting downtime, reducing waste, and extending the life of expensive assets. He also explains why the future of building operations will depend on a stronger data foundation, operational AI copilots, and systems that can support an aging workforce while making these roles more appealing to the next generation. What stood out for me was how practical this all became once we moved past the buzzwords. This was not a conversation about futuristic hype. It was about real examples, from occupancy-based HVAC control in offices and campuses to leak detection in schools, vaccine refrigeration monitoring, and hospital environments where downtime can carry enormous consequences. Bert makes a strong case that buildings are no longer just static structures. They are living operational environments filled with signals, systems, and opportunities that have been hiding in plain sight. We also touch on the wider picture, including what Bert learned from smart cities and energy grid modernization, and how those lessons now apply to commercial real estate, airports, research labs, and higher education campuses. There is a real sense that the physical world is entering a new chapter, one where AI starts to bridge the gap between digital intelligence and real-world action. If you have ever wondered what AI looks like when it leaves the screen and starts improving the places where people work, heal, travel, learn, and live, this episode will give you plenty to think about. As always, I would love to know what you think, are buildings finally ready to become truly responsive, and what opportunities or risks do you see ahead?

What does it really take to build the next generation of AI companies when the hype around scale begins to fade and real-world impact takes center stage? In this episode, I sit down with David Blumberg, founder and managing partner at Blumberg Capital, to unpack what he believes will define the next wave of AI startups. With a track record that includes being the first investor in companies like Nutanix, Braze, and DoubleVerify, David brings a perspective shaped by decades of identifying breakout innovation early. But what stood out most in our conversation was his belief that 2026 marks a turning point where intelligence moves beyond experimentation and becomes operational. We explore what that shift actually means in practice. David explains how AI is evolving from systems that generate insights into systems that take action, and why that distinction matters for founders, investors, and enterprise leaders alike. He shares how the most compelling startups today are not simply layering AI onto existing products, but embedding it deeply into workflows across industries like finance, security, and supply chain. These are companies built on proprietary data and real operational context, designed to make decisions with precision rather than simply process information. Our conversation also challenges some widely held assumptions about success in the AI space. David makes it clear that scale alone will not separate winners from the rest. Instead, the focus is shifting toward accuracy, reliability, and domain expertise. Founders who have lived the problems they are solving, rather than approaching them from the outside, are far more likely to build something defensible and lasting. It is a subtle shift, but one that could redefine how value is created in the years ahead. There is also a broader discussion about where investment is flowing and why. With the vast majority of companies Blumberg Capital now evaluates being rooted in AI, the bar for differentiation is rising fast. David offers insight into what his team is really looking for in founders entering this next cycle, and how startups can stand out in an increasingly crowded field. So as AI moves from promise to execution, and from experimentation to real-world outcomes, the question becomes harder to ignore. Are we ready to rethink how we measure success in the AI era, and what kind of companies will truly earn their place at the top?

How do we talk about artificial intelligence without ignoring the very human consequences it can have on our mental health? In this episode, I sit down with Dr. Ragy Girgis, Professor of Clinical Psychiatry at Columbia University, to unpack a topic that has quietly moved from the fringes of academic discussion into mainstream headlines. You have probably seen the term "AI psychosis" appearing more frequently, often surrounded by speculation, fear, or misunderstanding. But what does it actually mean, and how should we be thinking about it as these technologies become part of everyday life? Ragy brings a clinical and deeply considered perspective to the conversation. He explains that what we are seeing is not AI creating entirely new delusions out of thin air, but something more subtle and arguably more concerning. Large language models can reflect and reinforce ideas that already exist within a person's mind. For someone already vulnerable, that reinforcement can push a belief from uncertainty into absolute conviction. That shift, even if small, can have life-altering consequences. It raises uncomfortable questions about how persuasive technology interacts with fragile mental states. We also explore the comparison many people make with older internet rabbit holes, and why this new generation of AI tools feels different. There is something about conversational systems that mimic human interaction so convincingly that they can blur the line between reflection and validation. Ragy introduces a powerful analogy rooted in the story of Narcissus, which reframes the issue in a way that feels both timeless and unsettling. It is not about an external voice planting ideas, but about a mirror that becomes impossible to look away from. But this conversation is not about fear. It is about responsibility and awareness. We discuss practical steps that could help reduce risk, from how AI systems communicate their limitations, to the role of families and clinicians, and even the responsibility of tech companies to invest in research around early warning signs. There is a sense that we are only at the beginning of understanding this phenomenon, and that the decisions made now will shape how safely these tools evolve. So as AI continues to move closer to us, speaking in our language and responding in real time, how do we make sure it supports human wellbeing rather than quietly amplifying our most vulnerable moments? Useful Links Connect with Dr. Ragy Girgis, Professor of Clinical Psychiatry at Columbia UniversityTime Magazine Article Visit the May Sponsors of Tech Talks Network and learn more about the NordLayer Browser.

Why are so many AI projects failing to deliver real business value, despite the hype and investment? In this episode, I sit down with Jay Litkey, SVP of Cloud & FinOps at Flexera, to explore the growing gap between AI ambition and measurable results. We discuss why findings from PwC reveal that only a small percentage of CEOs are seeing both revenue growth and cost savings from AI, and why the issue often comes down to a lack of clear outcomes, financial discipline, and governance rather than the technology itself. Jay shares what organizations are getting wrong, why many are stuck in experimentation mode, and what it really means to go back to basics in 2026. The conversation also reframes FinOps for the AI era, moving beyond cost control to a model that connects AI usage directly to business value, aligns finance with engineering, and introduces the guardrails needed to scale responsibly. If you are investing in AI or planning your next move, this episode offers a clear lens on how to turn potential into performance. Useful Links Connect with Jay Litkey from FlexeraLearn More About Flexera Visit the May Sponsors of Tech Talks Network and learn more about the NordLayer Browser.

How do you bring people together to do better work when everything around them feels increasingly complex, distributed, and uncertain? In today's episode, I sat down with Jessica Guistolise from Lucid Software, and what struck me straight away was her belief that work has always been a group project, even if many organizations still behave as though it is not. Jessica shared how much of the friction we experience at work comes from misalignment, unclear expectations, and a lack of shared understanding. When teams are spread across time zones, systems, and now AI-powered workflows, those gaps only widen. Her perspective is simple but powerful. When people can actually see the work, rather than interpret it through documents, meetings, or assumptions, something shifts. Conversations become clearer, decisions become faster, and collaboration starts to feel human again. We also explored how visual collaboration platforms like those from Lucid Software are helping teams move away from scattered tools and disconnected workflows toward a more unified way of working. Jessica described it as having everything on one workbench, where teams can brainstorm, plan, and execute without constantly switching context. What really stayed with me was her focus on inclusivity in collaboration. Not everyone contributes in the same way, and visual environments can create space for different thinking styles, whether someone is outspoken, reflective, or somewhere in between. That idea of creating a shared language across teams, roles, and even personalities feels increasingly relevant in a world where communication often breaks down. Of course, no conversation right now would be complete without talking about AI. Jessica offered a refreshingly honest view. There is uncertainty, and there should be. But rather than avoiding it, she believes leaders need to make AI visible, map how it is used, define where human judgment matters, and encourage teams to experiment openly. One of the most interesting ideas she shared was reframing mistakes as early learnings. When teams feel safe to test, fail, and share what they discover, progress accelerates. When fear or blame enters the picture, everything slows down. We also touched on AI literacy and what it really means in practice. For Jessica, it comes down to clarity. Clear workflows, clear guardrails, and clear expectations about accountability. AI might assist, but humans remain responsible for outcomes. That mindset, combined with leadership that actively participates in experimentation, creates an environment where people feel confident stepping forward rather than holding back. This conversation left me thinking about how many organizations are still trying to layer AI onto unclear processes and expecting better results. Jessica's message is that clarity comes first, then technology can amplify it. So if work really is a group project, are we giving our teams the visibility and confidence they need to succeed, or are we still asking them to figure it out in the dark?

What happens when the very pricing model meant to speed up AI adoption ends up slowing it down? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I sit down with Sameet Gupte, CEO and co-founder of EvoluteIQ, to discuss a part of the enterprise AI story that still doesn't get enough attention. While so much of the conversation around AI focuses on models, copilots, and the latest agentic promises, Sameet brings the discussion back to a business reality that every enterprise leader understands. If the economics do not work, adoption stalls. And if success in a pilot makes the final rollout even more expensive, something has gone wrong long before the board signs off on scale. Sameet argues that many organizations are still trapped by legacy pricing structures built for an earlier generation of automation. Per-user and per-bot pricing may look manageable at the pilot stage. Once a company tries to expand automation across departments, processes, and geographies, the numbers can quickly stop making sense. That creates what many now call pilot purgatory, where a company proves something can work, but cannot justify taking it any further. It is a problem rooted in incentives, procurement, and fragmented technology stacks, and it is one that CFOs are watching very closely. What I found especially interesting in this conversation is how Sameet frames the issue. He believes most enterprises do not actually have an automation problem. They have an orchestration problem. In other words, the challenge is rarely a lack of tools. It is getting all the systems, workflows, approvals, data flows, and legacy infrastructure to work together to produce a clean business outcome. That idea changes the conversation from buying isolated features to rethinking the process as a whole. We also discuss why outcomes-based pricing is increasingly resonating with enterprise buyers. Sameet explains why predictable costs, transparent commercial models, and shared accountability are helping move automation conversations out of innovation teams and into the CFO's office. For public companies and large global enterprises, that matters. Leaders want fewer surprises, fewer overlapping vendors, and a much clearer line between spend and return. There is also a broader theme running through this episode about where the market is heading next. Sameet sees real urgency around vendor consolidation, enterprise simplification, and the need to rethink how AI is introduced into the business. His view is that companies need to pause, define what they actually want AI to do, and then choose tools that fit the business, rather than reshaping the business around the latest platform pitch. If you are trying to make sense of AI adoption beyond the hype, this conversation offers a practical and timely perspective on pricing, scale, and what real transformation could look like inside the enterprise. After listening, do you think the future of enterprise AI will be shaped as much by commercial models as by the technology itself, and what are you seeing in your own organization? Useful Links Connect with Sameet Gupte, CEO and co-founder of EvoluteIQLearn More About EvoluteIQ

How many bad customer experiences does it take before someone walks away for good? In my conversation with Amitha Pulijala, we explore why the answer might be fewer than most businesses are prepared for, and what that means for anyone investing in AI-powered customer experience. New research from Cyara reveals a stark reality. Twenty-eight percent of consumers will abandon a brand after just one poor interaction, and nearly half will do the same after only two or three. That leaves very little room for error at a time when more organizations are introducing AI into customer journeys, often at speed and at scale. Amitha, who leads product strategy in the AI and CX space, brings a grounded perspective shaped by years of working with large enterprises and complex contact center environments. What stood out in our discussion is how the real challenge is no longer about whether AI can handle customer interactions. In many cases, it already can. The issue is whether customers trust it enough to let it try. We unpack the growing perception gap: 73 percent of consumers still believe human agents resolve issues faster, even though AI systems can deliver near-instant responses. That disconnect often comes down to past experiences, from bots that fail to understand context to systems that trap users in frustrating loops with no clear way out. There is also a clear line that customers draw around where AI belongs. Routine, high-volume tasks such as password resets or appointment confirmations are widely accepted. But when conversations shift toward financial security, healthcare, or legal advice, expectations change. People want human judgment involved and reassurance that the outcome is reliable. What makes this conversation particularly relevant is the generational divide shaping expectations. Younger users are far more open to AI-led interactions, provided they work seamlessly. Older generations remain more cautious, often preferring the certainty of speaking with a human. That creates a design challenge for businesses trying to serve everyone without alienating anyone. Throughout the episode, Amitha emphasizes that trust is built through experience, not intention. That means testing AI systems in real-world conditions, monitoring how they perform over time, and ensuring that when things do go wrong, the transition to a human feels smooth and informed rather than abrupt and frustrating. This is not a conversation about replacing humans with machines. It is about understanding where AI can add speed and efficiency, where it should support human agents, and where it should step back entirely. The organizations getting this balance right are not the ones deploying AI the fastest, but the ones validating it most carefully before customers ever see it. As businesses race to embed AI at every touchpoint, a bigger question emerges. Are we building systems that customers actually trust, or are we creating new points of friction that push them away? Useful Links Connect with Amitha on LinkedIn Survey DataCyara WebsiteFollow Cyara on LinkedIn

What does it really take to move AI from endless experimentation into something that creates real business value? In this episode, I sat down with Tom Alexander, Head of Innovation and Transformation at CrossCountry Consulting, to talk about why so many organizations still struggle to turn AI ambition into meaningful outcomes. Tom works closely with executive and CFO teams that are either unsure where to begin or frustrated that early AI efforts have not delivered what they hoped for. We talked about why this is rarely just a technology issue. In many cases, the real blockers are ownership, change management, weak alignment across the business, and a failure to connect AI initiatives to the problems that matter most. One of the big themes in our conversation was the need to treat AI as an enterprise-wide program rather than a collection of isolated tools. Tom shared how leaders can focus on business processes first, identify where automation can genuinely improve performance, and avoid getting distracted by hype. We also unpacked the growing accountability challenge around AI, including who should own it, how stakeholders can align, and why strong foundations in data, governance, and training matter so much. This episode is packed with practical takeaways for anyone trying to make sense of AI adoption inside a business. If you are trying to figure out where to start, how to scale, or how to avoid another stalled initiative, there is a lot in here for you. After listening, I would love to hear your thoughts. How is your organization approaching AI, and where do you think most businesses are still getting it wrong? Useful Links CrossCountry websiteConnect with Tom Alexander on LinkedInField Notes podcast

Is the endpoint still just a device, or has it quietly become one of the most important control points in modern enterprise security? Recording live from IGEL Now And Next in Miami, I sat down once again with Darren Fields for what has become an annual check-in on how fast the industry is really changing. And this time, the conversation feels very different. Over the last 12 months, the discussion has moved well beyond traditional endpoint management. From global supply chain pressure driven by AI demand to rising hardware costs and unpredictable refresh cycles, the assumptions that once shaped endpoint strategy are starting to fall apart. Darren shares how organizations are now being forced into difficult decisions, absorb rising costs, delay investment, or rethink the model entirely. We also explore how that shift is changing the conversation at the leadership level. What was once seen as a procurement decision is increasingly being reframed as a resilience strategy. Extending hardware life, reducing dependency on supply chains, and maintaining operational continuity are becoming just as important as performance and cost. Security, of course, sits at the center of it all. With the majority of breaches still originating at the endpoint, Darren highlights how organizations are starting to rethink where they focus their efforts. Rather than focusing solely on data centers and cloud environments, there is growing recognition that control, visibility, and enforcement must occur at the edge. The conversation also touches on the reality of modern cyber threats. From constant attack attempts to incidents that leave organizations offline for weeks, the challenge is no longer just restoring systems but restoring access. And that shift has major implications for how recovery and continuity are designed moving forward. We also look at the growing convergence of IT and OT, the role of contextual access, and the balancing act between stronger security and user experience. With organizations at very different stages of their journey, there is no single path forward, but there is a clear sense that change is already underway. So as the pace of technology, risk, and demand continues to accelerate, one question remains. Are organizations adapting fast enough, or are they still relying on models that no longer reflect the world they are operating in? What do you think, are we finally seeing a shift toward treating the endpoint as a strategic priority, or is there still a gap between awareness and action?

What does it really take to move from talking about Zero Trust… to actually making it work in the real world? Recording live from IGEL Now And Next in Miami, I caught up with John Walsh for what has now become something of a tradition, our third conversation together, and one that reflects just how much has changed in the last 12 months. When we last spoke, the focus was on securing the edge and rethinking security through a preventative lens. This time, the conversation has expanded from IT to OT, from devices to platforms, and from theory to real-world implementation across manufacturing floors, healthcare environments, and government organizations. John shared how IGEL is increasingly being adopted as a global standard across both IT and operational environments, bringing new challenges and new insights. From kiosks and signage on factory floors to shared workstations in hospitals, the need for persona-based and now context-aware access is becoming far more than a technical concept. It is shaping how organizations think about identity, risk, and control at scale. We also explored how the idea of the "adaptive secure desktop" is evolving beyond traditional VDI thinking. Instead of static devices, the focus is shifting toward environments that respond dynamically to the user, their role, their location, and the level of risk in that moment. It raises an important question. How do you deliver that level of control without introducing friction for the user? AI inevitably entered the conversation, but not in the way many might expect. Rather than focusing on features, John highlighted the acceleration of threat velocity. The time between vulnerability discovery and exploitation is shrinking rapidly, and with AI amplifying that speed, traditional detection and response models are struggling to keep up. The implication is clear. Security strategies need to shift toward prevention and control, not just reaction. We also touched on emerging challenges around agentic AI, non-human identities, and the need to apply Zero Trust principles beyond people to machines. As organizations begin to explore these new models, questions around identity, access, and guardrails are becoming more complex and more urgent. And throughout the conversation, one theme kept coming back and reducing complexity while increasing control. Whether it is through immutable operating systems, centralized policy enforcement, or contextual access, the goal is to simplify the environment while strengthening security outcomes. As organizations continue their journey toward modernization, one question remains: Are we still layering new technology onto old models, or are we ready to rethink how access, identity, and control are delivered from the ground up? What do you think, is Zero Trust finally becoming real at the endpoint, or is there still a gap between strategy and execution?

How long would it actually take your organization to recover every endpoint after a major cyber incident? Recording live from IGEL Now And Next in Miami, I sat down with James Millington to explore a question that most businesses think they've answered, but rarely have. Because when you move beyond theory and start mapping out the real process, the numbers tell a very different story. James shared examples from real organizations that tried to calculate recovery at scale. One estimated it would take over 5,000 person-hours to rebuild their estate. Another believed they could recover quickly, until they realized the scale of their environment made that assumption unrealistic. It raises a deeper question. Are we focusing too much on recovery and not enough on resilience? The conversation quickly moved into what James calls the "endpoint recovery gap." While most organizations have invested heavily in data center resilience, failover environments, and backup strategies, far fewer have a clear plan for reconnecting users when endpoints are compromised. And without a working endpoint, even the most advanced infrastructure becomes inaccessible. We also explored why so many organizations continue to rely on reimaging devices as a primary recovery strategy, despite the time, complexity, and operational disruption it creates. In many cases, it's not just slow. It's impractical at scale. And perhaps more concerning, some organizations still admit to having no defined plan at all. One of the most memorable moments in the conversation came through a simple analogy. For years, we've been carrying the weight of outdated endpoint strategies, even though the solution has been sitting in front of us. Just like it took thousands of years to put wheels on a suitcase, the shift toward simpler, more resilient models often requires a moment of realization before change actually happens. As application delivery continues to move toward SaaS, DaaS, and cloud environments, the role of the endpoint is also being redefined. Analysts are now calling for a move toward immutable, non-persistent endpoints that reduce attack surface and enable faster recovery. But as James points out, the real challenge is not awareness. It's an action. As organizations continue to invest in security, infrastructure, and AI, one question remains: Are we still planning for recovery from failure, or are we finally designing systems that avoid it in the first place? What do you think, are businesses ready to rethink endpoint strategy, or are we still carrying the baggage of the past?