The next BriefingsDirect Voice of the Innovator discussion focuses on how advances in design enhance the total experience for IT operators. Stay with us now as we hear about the general philosophy and modernization of design, and how new discrete best practices are making usability a key ingredient of modern hybrid IT systems.
Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Read a full transcript or download
a copy.
To learn more about the latest in IT innovations, we're joined by Bryan Jacquot,
Vice President and Chief Design Officer at Hewlett Packard Enterprise (HPE). The discussion is moderated by Dana Gardner, Principal Analyst at Interarbor Solutions.
Here are some excerpts:
That progressed through the years, and I ended up continuing my passion for delivering on what our users’ needs are and how we can best enable them. Basically, that means not trying to jump too quickly to a solution, but first making sure that we understand the problems our users have. Then we can focus on innovating to deliver higher value to them, with a better understanding of what they need.
But there are also startups like Square, where they are making business transactions easier for startups. They also have hardware devices for enabling the card and chip readers for conducting transactions.
Looking under the covers of Synergy, the HPE OneView platform and the Composer Card is what actually drives a lot of the innovation and makes composability possible, and it’s based on software. These are all good examples of where we identified the business needs to make users more efficient. Now they no longer have to wait weeks or months to get access to a resource, with HPE Synergy they can access and consume those resources immediately. That’s an example of an integrated system we have developed in order to deliver on a customer need.
To hear him talk through that and
knowing from the cognitive side that someone in that situation, if they are low
on sleep, they are probably not very happy about being there, they are also
going to be more prone to making errors. Their judgment is not going to be as
clear. You put these factors together, and it was a miserable experience for
him.
Here are some excerpts:
Gardner: Bryan,
what are the drivers requiring change and innovation when it comes to the
design of IT systems?
Jacquot: If I
go back 15 to 20 years, people were deeply steeped in their given technology,
whether it happened to be servers, networking, or storage. They would spend a
lot of time in training, get certified, and have a specialized role.
 |
| Jacquot |
What we are seeing much more
frequently now is, number one, the skill set of our people in IT is raising up to
higher levels in the infrastructure. We are not so much concerned with the
lower-level details. Instead, it’s about solving business needs and helping
customers, usually in the lines of business (LOBs). IT must help their
customers do things faster, because the pace and the speed of change in every business
today continues to accelerate.
With design, we are attempting
to understand and embrace our customers where they are, but also, we want to help
enable them to achieve their business needs and deliver the IT services that
their customers are requiring in a more efficient, agile, and responsive
manner.
Gardner:
Bryan, because the addressable audience is expanding beyond pure IT
administrators, what needs to happen to design now that we have more people involved?
Know your user
Jacquot: The
first thing you have to do is know who your user is. If you don’t know that,
then any design work is going to fall short. And now the design work that
systems at IT companies are delivering is not only delivered toward IT but also
different contingents within their businesses. It might be developers who are
in a LOB trying to create the next service or business application that enables
their business to be successful.
Again, if we look back, the
CIO or leaders in IT in the past would have chosen a given platform, whether a database
to standardize on or an application server. Nowadays, that’s not what happens.
Instead, the LOBs have choices. If they want to consume an open source project or
use a service that someone else created, they have that choice.
Now IT is in the position of
having to provide a service that is on par, able to move quickly and
efficiently, and meets the needs of developers and LOBs. And that’s why it’s so
important for design to expand the users we are targeting.
IT can no longer just be the
people who used to do the maintaining of IT infrastructure; it now includes a secondary
set of users who are consuming the resources and ultimately becoming the
decision-makers.
In fact, recent IDC
research talks about IT budgets and who controls more of the budget. In the
last year or two, the pendulum has swung to the point where the LOBs are controlling
the majority of the spend, even if IT is ultimately the one procuring resources
or assets. The decision-making has shifted over to LOBs in many companies. And
so, it becomes more and more imperative for IT to have solutions in place to meet
those needs.
If we are going to serve that
market as designers, we have to be aware of that, know who the ultimate users
are, and make sure they are satisfied and able to do what they have to do to
deliver what their businesses need.
Gardner: It wasn’t
that long ago that IT was only competing with the previous version of whatever it
is that they provided to their end users. But now, IT competes with the cloud
offerings, Software as a service (SaaS) offerings,
and open source solutions. You could also say that IT competes with the experience
that consumers get in their homes, and so there are heightened expectations on
usability.
Jacquot: Yes,
it really has raised expectations, and that’s a good thing. IT is now looking
around and saying, “Okay, for the LOBs we used to serve, it used to be, ‘Here
is what you get, and don’t throw a fit.’” But that doesn’t really work anymore.
Now IT has to provide business value to those LOBs, or they will vote with
their dollars and choose something else.
Just as we’ve seen in the
consumer space -- where things are getting more-and-more centered around the
experience of the service -- that same thinking is moving into the enterprise.
It raises what the enterprise traditionally does to a new level of the
experience of what developers and LOBs really need. But the same could apply to
researchers or other sets of users. These are the people trying to find the
next cure for Alzheimer’s or enabling genetic testing of new medicines. These
are not IT people -- they just need a simple infrastructure experience to run
their experiments.
To do that they are going to
choose a service that enables them to be as quick and efficient with their
research as they possibly can be. It doesn’t matter for them if it’s in a big public
cloud or if it’s in local IT -- as long as they are able to do it with the
least amount of effort on their part. That’s a trend that we are certainly
seeing. IT has to deliver services that meet the needs of those users where ever
they are.
Gardner:
Bryan, tell us about yourself. What does it take in terms of background, skills,
and general understanding to be a Chief Design Officer in this new day and age,
given these new requirements?
Drawn by design, to design
Jacquot: There
is a wide variety of backgrounds for people who have a similar title and role. In
my particular case, I began as a software engineer; my undergraduate degree is
in computer science. I began at HP working on the UNIX operating system (OS),
down in the kernel of all things, about as far as you can get from where I am
now.
One of the first projects I
worked on at HP was deployment and OS installation mechanisms. We had gotten a
bunch of errors and warnings during that process. I was just a kid out of
college; I didn’t know what was going on. I kept asking questions: “Why do we have
so many errors and warnings?” They were like, “Oh, that’s just the way it
works.” I was like, “Well, why is that okay? Why are we doing it that way?”
The next OS release was the
first one in ages that had no errors and warnings. I didn’t realize it at the
time, but that’s where I started this passion for doing the right thing for the
user and making sure that a user is able to understand what’s going on and how
to be successful with their systems.
The
next OS release was the first one in ages that had no errors and
warnings. That's where I began this passion for doing the right thing
for the user and making sure that a user is able to understand what is
going on and how to be successful.
That progressed through the years, and I ended up continuing my passion for delivering on what our users’ needs are and how we can best enable them. Basically, that means not trying to jump too quickly to a solution, but first making sure that we understand the problems our users have. Then we can focus on innovating to deliver higher value to them, with a better understanding of what they need.
At that point, then I went
back and earned my graduate degree in human-computer interaction with a focus
on psychology, understanding human factors and how people think. That includes
understanding how they use their working memory and how they process information,
so we can build solutions that best align to how people naturally operate.
That’s one of the key things I
found from my original background and then the most recent training. The best
solutions we can build are the ones that fit as seamlessly as possible into the
user’s hands, whether they are working with something digitally or physically.
For me, that was the combination
that led to where I am now and being able to have successful delivery of
various products and solutions -- offerings that are really focused on meeting
the customers’ needs.
Agility arrives with speed
Gardner: As an
advocate for the user, and broadening the definition of who that user is when
it comes to core IT services, what are the top challenges that those users now have?
Are we dealing with complexity, with interfaces, and with logic? All the above?
What are the latest problems that we are trying to solve?
Jacquot: It
certainly can be both logic and complexity. Systems are getting more complex.
But, number one, from the
customers I have talked to, the consistent overriding theme is they are under
threat of being disrupted by somebody. And if they are not being disrupted by
someone else, they are trying to disrupt themselves to prevent someone else
from disrupting them. This is the case across all customers and across every
industry.
And so, if they are in the mode
where they have to be constantly pushing themselves -- pushing the boundaries
and having to move fast -- then the overarching themes I am hearing about are
speed and agility. That means removing as much work from what IT has to do as
possible. Then they can focus their time and energy on the business problems,
not on the IT scaffolding, foundation, and structure to support what they are
trying to do.
Whether it’s in hospitals,
where they are trying to deliver better patient care using medical records, or
it’s in the finance industry, where they are trying to get the next trade done
faster -- whatever the work happens to be, the focus is always about speed and
agility.
And so, anything that we can
build (application or user experience
(UX)) for those users to help them be more efficient, are the things the
drive the greatest degree of success.
Gardner: Given
that design emphasis, it sounds a lot like the design of applications. But
these aren’t necessarily applications. These are systems, platforms, and
support products that may have even come together from mergers and acquisitions.
What’s the difference between
designing an application, as a software developer, and designing an IT system
or platform that often can come from the integration of multiple products?
Design to meet users’ needs
Jacquot: I
would argue that in the design process, the techniques, capabilities, and skills
needed to solve the problems are actually the same, regardless of the type of
product. The things that tend to change are who the users are and what they
need. Those are the two key variables in the equation that are going to vary.
If you look at many of the startups
out there today, they are delivering SaaS capabilities, whether it’s Uber and
making transportation different, or Airbnb remaking the lodging experience to
be simpler, easier, and more flexible. They are completely software based.
But there are also startups like Square, where they are making business transactions easier for startups. They also have hardware devices for enabling the card and chip readers for conducting transactions.
At the end of the day, the
things that we build are just a byproduct of, “Okay, we have an understanding
of the user. We know what we need to build to make them successful. Let’s
figure out the right widget or gadget to meet that need.”
That can be a hardware system,
like HPE
Synergy, where we identified a need to be more flexible to compose and recompose
IT resources on-demand. That platform didn’t exist two and a half years ago.
If we could have done it only with software, we would have, but the software needed
a new hardware platform to run on, so we created both.
These
are all good examples of where we identified the business needs to make
users more efficient. Now they no longer have to wait weeks or months
to get access to a resource. With HPE Synergy they can access resources
immediately.
Looking under the covers of Synergy, the HPE OneView platform and the Composer Card is what actually drives a lot of the innovation and makes composability possible, and it’s based on software. These are all good examples of where we identified the business needs to make users more efficient. Now they no longer have to wait weeks or months to get access to a resource, with HPE Synergy they can access and consume those resources immediately. That’s an example of an integrated system we have developed in order to deliver on a customer need.
Gardner: A lot
of what goes on with composability and contextually aware applications nowadays
uses data to develop inference, to anticipate the needs of a user, and provide
them with the right information, not overload, so they can innovate and be creative.
How do you create a proper balance
between context and overload? It seems to me that’s a very difficult sweet spot
to get to.
Getting to know you, all about you
Jacquot: It
definitely is. This is a challenge we have been attempting to address in my
group for years. How do you get just the right amount of data without becoming overwhelming?
That’s actually a really hard problem because it turns out our systems are incredibly
complex. They have a lot of information. But knowing exactly what a given user
is going to need at any point in time -- and not giving them anything more -- is
a hard problem to solve.
As users are looking at
screens, if you put too much information up there, then they can get overloaded.
The visual search time that they will spend to find the information they care
about, creates more chance of making an error.
Striking the right balance
comes down to a couple of things. Number one, there is the initiative that
folks in my group have begun driving that we talk about as Know Me,
which means we know the user. What I mean by that is, not just that we
understand the user, but when a user accesses our system, the system knows who
they are; it knows them.
So, it knows the things that
they tend to use more often. It knows the environment that they have, what
constitutes the scale they are using, and what constitutes the depth of
information they tend to go to. And using that along with machine learning (ML)
to enhance the information we are providing them -- to make their experience
richer -- is going to be the thing to pursue to make our systems even better.
And again, it’s not just
knowing who they are. In the background, when we were designing the system, it’s
more than just taking their preferences into account. I am talking about when
they log in, the system knows it was “Dana”, for example, that once logged in.
It knows that these are the things that are important to Dana, and it makes that
experience richer because of that background and information we have.
Gardner: You
have been doing this for a long time, and you have seen a lot of the psychology
around innovation. But what have you personally learned about innovation? How
do you even define innovation? It might be different than most other people.
Jacquot: Yes,
it might be. In the places I have seen innovation the most, it is not like just
having an epiphany. All of a sudden, I have the answer, it’s there in front of
me, and we just need to go build it. I wish that were the case, but that doesn’t
happen for me.
For me, it requires taking the
time to understand the customer very well, as I mentioned earlier -- to the
point of being able to empathize with them, where is the pain that they
experience -- or the joy that they experience – it becomes something that I
feel as well.
If you look at the definition
of empathy, that’s what it means. It’s not just a fancy word of being
empathetic and understanding. But it’s actually feeling the pain and the joy of
the person you are empathizing with.
Once that is established, then
comes the creativity, with the ability to explore ideas, try things, throw them
out, and try again. You can start down that path to share ideas with your
prospective users and get feedback on it.
First the mess, then the masterpiece
I don’t
get it right the first time. In fact, I expect to get a bunch of this wrong
before I get it right.
If you were to do a Google
search on “design” or “design thinking” and look at the pictures that come up,
a lot of them look very orderly, and very orthodox. Depending on which one you
see, you will ask some initial questions, do ideating and prototyping, and
synthesis and gathering feedback, and so on.
But there is one thing that
all those pictures miss; and that is as you are going through this process, and
you get a better understanding, you take turns that you didn’t expect. You have
to be willing to take those turns to get to the nugget of what’s possible, to get
to the core of the potential of a solution you are innovating. So, it can get messy.
We don’t go in straight line.
It’s curvy, it’s a squiggly line all over the place. We start by finding good
places where things are resonating, and we continue to refine and iterate until
we get to the point when we’ve got a foundation. Then we will go build and
deliver on that -- and then the next squiggly, messy area starts up again in a continuous
cycle that never ends.
Innovation looks messy and
uncoordinated. It requires a lot of listening and understanding. And then the
creative side comes in. We can brainstorm and explore. I really enjoy that side
of it. But it has to start with understanding, and of not trying to be too
rigid. [If you’re too rigid,] I think you would miss out on the opportunities
that are there, but not as easy to spot.
Gardner: I
love that idea of the journey from messiness to clarity and then productivity.
Do you have any examples, Bryan, that would show a use-case that demonstrates
that journey? Where at HPE have you made that journey?
Jacquot: I led
the design team, and I was a chief technologist for HPE OneView
during its early incubation, of getting it into a product and then releasing it
to the market. There was one customer I remember specifically at a financial
firm, and he was describing one of the tasks he had to do at 2 a.m. because
that was the window in which he could make a change to the infrastructure without
disrupting the business.
We went back and said, “Okay, we
can make the system be able to perform these operations where it doesn’t
require being offline and done in the middle of the night.”
That was an example of,
through discovery of a pain point and hearing the things a customer is having
to go through. As a result, we made a pretty dramatic change in the way we were
addressing this issue for a particular user. But as we discussed it with other customers,
he wasn’t the only one. This scenario wasn’t an anomaly; this was a pretty
consistent thing.
Even though the clarity that
he described in his situation was easy for us to grab a hold of, it was a
common thing. The solution ended up being one of the key capabilities that we
delivered as part of that platform, and it continues to expand today.
And that non-disruptive update
feature was grounded in early-on research. It’s just one example of going from
a squiggly to something that’s been very well-received.
Place process before products
Another
example came about differently, and with a different timescale, but it was also
pretty impactful in HPE’s transformation. A few years ago, we were going
through some separations, with the HPE software group and DXC, for example.
At the time, we didn’t have an
offering in the hyperconverged infrastructure (HCI) market. HPE knew this was a
place we needed to tackle. It was a big growth opportunity. So, a small team
was put together to identify ways we could provide an HCI solution. And so,
with the research we had done, we knew it was a better opportunity if we
provided something that was simple and would appeal to the LOBs we talked about
earlier.
Those LOBs might be a
developer or a researcher, but they would want access to infrastructure quickly,
without waiting for IT. They would want a self-service interface that enabled a
simple way to get access to resources.
So, we started on this
project. The senior leaders at the time gave us three months to build a solution.
We rapidly took assets we had and began assembling them together into a good
solution. It ultimately took us five months, not three, to introduce what was
the HPE Hyper Converged 380 platform.
Now, if you go look on hpe.com, that’s
not a solution you are going to find today because we ultimately acquired SimpliVity,
and that’s the product that is filling that need and that business area for us.
The one that we made, the 380, was a short-term activity we did to get into the
market.
Some of these projects that we
engage in can include long research; we spend a couple of years understanding
the users and refining, and prototyping and iterating. Other ones can be done
on the shorter scale. You’ve got a few months to get something into market and
start getting feedback, getting customers using it. Then you start iterating
and driving from there, and that’s the one [HPE Hyper Converged 380 platform]
was a really good example.
And we won several different innovation
awards with that platform, even though it was created in a very tight timeline.
The usability of it was really strong, and we got some good feedback as our
entryway into the hyperconverged market.
Gardner: And
other than awards, which are fantastic of course, what are some other metrics
or indicators that you did it right? When people do design, and people use
really good design, what do they get for it? How do you know it?
Get it right, true to your values
Jacquot:
Number one, it’s hugely important that if you aren’t getting business results,
then something is wrong. If you design the right product and deliver it to the
market, then good business results should follow.
The other part of it is we use
various metrics internally. We are constantly following our products, and we
can access the user success rates, the retention rates. If they are
experiencing errors, we know what the ratios are. All those kinds of metrics
and analytics are important, but those aren’t the number one thing that I would
look at. The number one is the business results.
After a while, you can track
things like brand loyalty, brand favorability, and net promoter score.
What I have been attracted to
more-and-more recently, however, is the HPE values. We state that our mission
is to improve the way people live and work. l will be honest, when we first
started talking about that, I felt we were accomplishing a lot of great things
but wasn’t exactly sure if they aligned to our mission.
We
use various metrics internally. We are constantly following our
products, and we can access the users' success rates, the retention
rates. If they are experiencing errors, we know what the ratios are. But
the number one metric is the business results.
Now, I look at how some of these examples are coming through, and what HPE customers are achieving – things like helping to combat human trafficking by finding pictures of people on the dark web and matching them with missing person cases using artificial intelligence (AI) and ML. There’s also the Alzheimer’s study and how we are enabling that massive study to try and find a cure for Alzheimer’s.
Those are some really positive
things that are becoming metrics that I care a lot about. I love seeing those stories
and being a part of the team and the company that’s making those things
possible. Because ultimately, if we are going to spend our time and energy
designing great solutions, the outcome should affect all of those areas
including doing good for the world.
Gardner: In
closing out, let’s look to the future. You mentioned AI. It seems to me that
we’re trying to find another balance here in letting the machines do what they
do best -- and then delegating to the people what they do best, which is what
machines can’t do. Is part of what you see in your design role at HPE going
down that path of finding that balance? How will AI impact the way products are
used and people interact with them in the future?
Expand what’s humanly possible
Jacquot: So,
the ethics of design, I think, is a really rich topic. That’s a discussion all
of itself. But I think the question specifically around AI and ML, is that there
are things that you look at that could be possible. Some have experimented by
putting bots that watch traffic on Twitter, and they start responding. And they
often degenerate to a pretty bad place.
The whole AI and ML field is
one where ethics are involved and require putting the right guardrails in place.
That’s something we as an industry and as a population are going to have to
watch closely, because it’s clear that just by nature, not everything goes in a
positive direction.
And I think we are trying to
use it in a way to make the humans better in what we are doing and making us
more efficient.
We can hear things in
auditory, we can hear in omni-direction, but our senses are limited. On the
other hand, an autonomous vehicle can look in 360 degrees, it’s empowered with
it, it can use things like ultrasound and infrared to detect beyond what humans
can see at night, for example, seeing animals on the side roads.
AI and ML in a vehicle are much
more capable, and they don’t fatigue, they don’t get distracted. They don’t get
angry and don’t get road rage. So, there are a lot of benefits that we as the users
of those vehicles can benefit from, as long as we put the right guardrails in
place that will actually make humans better at what they are doing and safer
than when we are actually in charge behind the wheel.
We will use ML and AI to empower our users, whether it be developers, or admin to see better what’s happening. I think a great example of that is what we are doing with HPE InfoSight.
When we are ingesting massive
amounts of data from our system and then using that to make better predictions and
ensure making things happen when it needs to happen and making sure that if
there is something that’s going wrong – it can be detected and addressed before
it even becomes a problem and impacts business continuity. And that’s just one
of the ways that we are using AI and ML. But I would say the big overriding
thing with AI and ML is using it in a way to augment what we can do and making
sure that ethics are first and foremost considered because it’s clear, just
left on their own, things could go in directions that we probably don’t want
them to.
Listen to the podcast. Find it on iTunes. Read a full transcript or download
a copy. Sponsor: Hewlett
Packard Enterprise.
You may also be
interested in:
- How HCI forms a simple foundation for hybrid cloud, edge, and composable infrastructure
- How Ferrara Candy depends on automated IT intelligence to support rapid business growth
- How real-time data streaming and integration set the stage for AI-driven DataOps
- How the composable approach to IT aligns automation and intelligence to overcome mounting complexity
- How Texmark Chemicals pursues analysis-rich, IoT-pervasive path to the ‘refinery of the future’
- How HPC supports 'continuous integration of new ideas' for optimizing Formula 1 car design
- Want to manage your total cloud costs better? Emphasize the ‘Ops’ in DevOps, says Futurum analyst Daniel Newman
- A new Mastercard global payments model creates a template for an agile, secure, and compliant hybrid cloud
- Where the rubber meets the road: How users see the IT4IT standard building competitive business advantage
No comments:
Post a Comment