Tech Talks Daily

Neil C. Hughes

If every company is now a tech company and digital transformation is a journey rather than a destination, how do you keep up with the relentless pace of technological change?

Every day, Tech Talks Daily brings you insights from the brightest minds in tech, business, and innovation, breaking down complex ideas into clear, actionable takeaways.

Hosted by Neil C. Hughes, Tech Talks Daily explores how emerging technologies such as AI, cybersecurity, cloud computing, fintech, quantum computing, Web3, and more are shaping industries and solving real-world challenges in modern businesses.

Through candid conversations with industry leaders, CEOs, Fortune 500 executives, startup founders, and even the occasional celebrity, Tech Talks Daily uncovers the trends driving digital transformation and the strategies behind successful tech adoption. But this isn't just about buzzwords.

We go beyond the hype to demystify the biggest tech trends and determine their real-world impact. From cybersecurity and blockchain to AI sovereignty, robotics, and post-quantum cryptography, we explore the measurable difference these innovations can make.

Whether improving security, enhancing customer experiences, or driving business growth, we also investigate the ROI of cutting-edge tech projects, asking the tough questions about what works, what doesn't, and how businesses can maximize their investments.

Whether you're a business leader, IT professional, or simply curious about technology's role in our lives, you'll find engaging discussions that challenge perspectives, share diverse viewpoints, and spark new ideas.

New episodes are released daily, 365 days a year, breaking down complex ideas into clear, actionable takeaways around technology and the future of business.

Subscribe Listen in podnod RSS feed Show website

2,000 episodes
Updated Today

Episodes2000

Newest first

July 21 · 23 min
Why Extreme Networks Says Executives Now Expect AI ROI Within Weeks
How quickly should an AI investment begin producing measurable business results? In this episode, I speak with Monica Kumar, Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer at Extreme Networks, about the growing pressure on technology leaders to prove that AI investments are producing financial and operational value. The conversation draws on Extreme Networks' State of AI for Networking 2026 report, based on a global survey of 200 C-level executives and vice presidents of IT. The findings suggest that enterprise AI has entered a far less forgiving phase. Experimentation continues, but executives increasingly want evidence that deployments are reducing costs, improving productivity or creating better user experiences. The most striking result is the speed now expected. Some 57 percent of respondents said they expect measurable AI impact within weeks or sooner, compared with 16 percent in the previous year. Projects that once might have received six or 12 months to demonstrate value may now face questions within 30 or 60 days. Monica explains why these demands are changing which AI projects receive attention. Leaders are looking for use cases connected with existing operational problems, where results can be measured and communicated clearly. This makes enterprise networking an interesting test case. AI workloads depend on network compute, bandwidth, availability and access to current data. According to the research, 92 percent of respondents said AI is increasing demands on network compute and bandwidth. A fragmented or outdated network may therefore limit the performance of the AI applications running across it. The network can also provide an early opportunity to show what AI produces in practice. Monica discusses performance monitoring, predictive analysis, troubleshooting, compliance checks, capacity planning and security. These are repetitive, data-heavy activities where improvements can be measured in time saved, fewer support tickets and better service availability. A case from Middlesbrough College brings those claims into focus. The college reports that firmware tracking fell from as much as five hours each week to approximately five minutes, while the time spent troubleshooting decreased by around 90 percent. For a small network team, the value comes from giving people additional capacity without asking them to monitor every device or event manually. We also discuss why AI capabilities work better when embedded within normal business systems rather than added as another standalone tool. If an AI service remains outside the daily workflow, employees must move between platforms, transfer information and interpret the result themselves. Integrated AI can monitor the network, identify anomalies, recommend action and automate routine work within the environment where the team already operates. Monica also warns that the quality of AI depends heavily on its data. Before investing in another model or application, businesses need accurate, current and well-managed information. They must also examine whether their network has the capacity to support additional workloads and whether employees understand how to use AI responsibly. If executives expect AI results within weeks, are businesses selecting the right use cases, or simply imposing unrealistic deadlines on complicated technology programs? Listen to the episode and share your thoughts with me.
July 20 · 30 min
Commvault: Why Your Disaster Recovery Plan Could Make Ransomware Worse
Could the disaster recovery plan designed to protect your company make a ransomware incident even worse? In this episode, I speak with Darren Thomson, Vice President and Chief Technology Officer for EMEA at Commvault, about Resilience Operations, commonly known as ResOps, and why cyber recovery now requires security, infrastructure, identity and data teams to work from one coordinated plan. Darren argues that many companies are accepting a difficult reality. Even with considerable investment in prevention and detection, a breach may eventually succeed. That does not make cybersecurity controls any less necessary, but it means recovery can no longer be treated as a secondary activity managed by another department. The problem is that security operations and infrastructure teams have traditionally worked toward different objectives. Security specialists concentrate on identifying and stopping threats. Infrastructure teams protect data, maintain backups and restore systems after outages. During a cyberattack, a successful recovery requires both sets of expertise. A backup administrator may be able to restore data quickly, but a forensic specialist must establish whether that data is clean. Without that confirmation, the company risks restoring malware and restarting the incident. Darren explains why a conventional disaster recovery plan may be particularly dangerous during ransomware. These plans were commonly designed for physical failures such as a lost data center. Data would be copied from one location to another so operations could continue. If the source data is infected, however, fast replication can carry the malware into the recovery environment. This is where ResOps enters the discussion. Darren describes it as an operating model rather than a product. It combines established practices from security and infrastructure management into a continuous program for testing, learning and improving recovery. Individual technology projects may come from the program, but resilience itself never reaches a final completion date. AI adds pressure on both sides. Criminals can use it to create faster and more effective attacks, while defenders can use machine learning to inspect large volumes of information, detect patterns and identify the newest clean recovery point. Companies must also protect AI systems as they would any other business application, including the models, data repositories and identities connected with them. Darren offers one practical starting point for CIOs and CISOs: Mean Time to Clean Recovery, or MTCR. This measures how long it takes to restore an application and its data with evidence that both are free from compromise. Before measuring MTCR, leaders must define their minimum viable company. These are the systems and services the business cannot operate without. Once that list exists, teams can test how long a verified clean recovery would take and replace assumptions with evidence. The initial answer may be uncomfortable. Teams may know how to restore an application without knowing whether the backup is clean. Security may know how to inspect the system but lack an established workflow with the recovery team. Darren sees those gaps as the starting point for a useful ResOps program because they provide everyone with a shared problem and a measurable objective. If your most important systems disappeared today, how long would it take to bring the minimum viable company back using verified clean data? Listen to the episode and share your answer with me.
July 19 · 28 min
How AI Is Taking the Guesswork Out of Cross Border Delivery
Why can we track a meal traveling across town almost minute by minute, yet an international parcel can seemingly disappear between checkout and delivery? In this episode, I speak with Dieter Van Putte from Crossborder Global, a division of Bnode that provides global commerce and logistics services. Dieter oversees technology and operations across Landmark Global and Apple Express, giving him a close view of what happens when retailers attempt to sell and deliver products across international markets. Dieter explains why cross border delivery remains so difficult to track despite years of investment in supply chain technology. A domestic shipment may involve one main carrier, but an international order can pass between warehouses, road carriers, airports, airlines, customs authorities and final-mile delivery companies. Each participant may record events differently, operate at a different level of technical maturity or provide information at a different speed. We discuss why the customer rarely sees this complexity. They simply expect to know when their order will arrive, what duties and taxes they must pay, plus what will happen if the product needs to be returned. When retailers cannot provide those answers, the problem quickly becomes one of trust rather than logistics alone. Dieter also describes the less visible cost of manual reconciliation. Teams can spend hours checking carrier websites, comparing rates, reviewing spreadsheets, correcting customs information and translating inconsistent tracking events. Mistakes create further work through delayed parcels, billing disputes, customer inquiries and complaints. The direct labor cost matters, but the effect on repeat purchases and customer reviews may prove even more expensive. Our conversation then turns to the role of automation and AI. Dieter explains how technology can support product classification, customs documentation, landed-cost calculations and exception handling. We also examine logistics control towers, which combine data from multiple parties to provide an end-to-end view of an order. With enough reliable information, these systems can detect patterns, predict delays and recommend or initiate corrective action before the customer is affected. There is plenty of promise here, but good software cannot remove every customs rule, carrier handoff or data-quality problem. Retailers still need the right partners, accurate product information and a clear understanding of the promise they are making at checkout. Could better use of data finally make international delivery feel as dependable as domestic shipping, and what would need to change first? Listen to the conversation and share your thoughts with me.
July 19 · 38 min
What Non-Technical Founders Need to Know Before Building With AI
Do you need to understand code before you can build a technology company or lead a team of developers? Five years after our previous conversation, I welcome Sophia Matveeva back to the podcast. Sophia is the founder of Tech for Non-Techies, where she helps founders and business professionals understand how technology products are created, tested, managed and turned into commercial ventures. A great deal has changed since we last spoke. Generative AI tools can now turn a written description into a working prototype within hours. For someone who has spent years believing a lack of coding experience disqualified them from building a technology business, that removes a significant barrier. Sophia believes this is the best time yet to be a non-technical founder, although her reasoning goes beyond AI-assisted coding. Research into billion-dollar technology companies shows that non-technical founders now make up a much larger share of founding teams than they did a decade ago. Many of these businesses sell technology to other companies, where commercial knowledge, customer relationships and an understanding of industry problems matter enormously. We discuss where AI belongs in the founder journey. Sophia recommends using tools such as Lovable or Replit to create a simple test product, show it to potential customers and learn whether people would use or pay for the idea. This allows founders to test their assumptions before committing substantial money to development. The boundary appears when that prototype becomes a real product. Once software stores customer information, processes payments or supports a commercial service, security and technical architecture cannot be treated as optional details. Sophia argues that professional developers are still needed to inspect the code, prepare the product for production and address problems a non-technical founder may not know exist. Her point is simple. AI can help a founder reach the testing stage sooner and at a lower cost. It cannot tell someone with no engineering experience whether the generated code is safe, maintainable or ready to support paying customers. Sophia also shares what she learned from managing her first development team. After raising investment, she attempted to compensate for her technical insecurity by taking a coding course and becoming involved in work she did not fully understand. The result was micromanagement, constant interruptions and frustrated developers. A better approach begins with business priorities. Founders should explain what customers want, ask developers about effort and tradeoffs, agree on what will be delivered during the next work cycle, then give the team the space required to complete it. They should also allow time for technical debt, the less visible maintenance work that prevents hurried development from creating larger problems later. We finish with advice for any business leader who wants greater technology fluency. Sophia recommends joining product meetings, contributing customer knowledge and building relationships with technical colleagues who want to understand the commercial side of the company. Neither side needs to become the other. They need enough shared language to make better decisions together. If AI has removed the cost of testing many technology ideas, what is stopping you from finding out whether yours could work? Listen to the episode, try Sophia's exercise and share your experience with me.
July 18 · 21 min
Why AI Cannot Fix a Business It Does Not Understand
What happens when an AI agent begins influencing business decisions without fully understanding the systems, processes and dependencies behind them? In this episode, I speak with Bert van der Zwan, CEO of Bizzdesign, about the gap between enterprise AI expectations and the results many companies are seeing in practice. Bert has spent more than 25 years in software and SaaS leadership, including executive roles at Webex, Bynder, Twinfield and Unit4. Bert offers a candid assessment of the current AI market. He believes AI will have a lasting effect on businesses and society, but argues that expectations for near-term financial returns have become inflated. Many companies are spending money on tools and experimentation without reducing costs, consolidating software or producing new revenue. That does not mean experimentation is a mistake. Bert sees it as a necessary stage. The harder question is how companies move from a growing collection of pilots to AI capabilities that can operate dependably inside the business. One barrier is fragmented organizational context. Large enterprises have often grown through a combination of internal expansion and acquisitions, leaving behind disconnected applications, inconsistent data definitions and processes that cross several departments. An AI system working with only part of that picture may make a fast decision, but that does not make it a good decision. Bert argues that AI needs an authoritative view of how the enterprise works. Systems, processes, ownership, dependencies, approval status and policy restrictions must be visible and consistently defined. Without that shared context, AI may reproduce existing silos or make them worse. We also discuss the risks boards and technology leaders should consider as AI agents become involved in operational decisions. These include unreliable data, unclear accountability, legal exposure, weak governance and an incomplete view of the process being changed. Human oversight remains necessary, particularly when an automated decision could affect customers, employees or major investments. Bert then introduces the idea of "bespoke from the cloud." Traditional SaaS products were built around largely standardized interfaces and workflows. AI-assisted development could make software far easier to personalize around individual customers and use cases. This may give users greater control, but it could also challenge long-term software contracts and the economics that have supported the SaaS market. For leaders trying to connect AI spending with business results, Bert recommends beginning with visibility and a clearly defined outcome. Every initiative should be judged by whether it reduces costs, increases revenue or shortens the time required to deliver value. If AI depends on understanding how a company actually works, have businesses invested enough in creating that shared understanding before adding agents to their operations? Listen to the episode and share your thoughts with me.
July 18 · 18 min
How AI Voice Scams Turn Personal Phones Into a Business Risk
Can you still trust an incoming phone call when AI can imitate a familiar voice, personalize the conversation and target information specifically to you? In this episode, I speak with Alex Quilici, CEO of YouMail, about how artificial intelligence is changing phone fraud and why the personal devices carried by employees are becoming part of the corporate attack surface. Alex explains how YouMail uses data from its consumer call-protection service to identify scam behavior, understand the type of fraud taking place and connect those patterns with the phone numbers involved. Advances in large language models have improved this analysis, but the same technology is also helping criminals build far more convincing campaigns. Generic robocalls are being replaced by personalized conversations designed to extract information, impersonate trusted people and manipulate victims. Fraudsters can use AI throughout the attack chain, from identifying targets and analyzing stolen data to generating dialogue and adapting an approach during the call. Alex argues that attackers have adopted these capabilities faster than many defenders expected because successful fraud produces an immediate financial return. The conversation also examines why voice biometrics can no longer be treated as sufficient proof of identity. As voice-cloning tools improve, companies may need to combine multiple forms of authentication and move sensitive communications into trusted applications. A call received through a banking app, for example, could give the customer greater confidence that the caller really represents their bank. For businesses, the risk extends beyond company-managed technology. Attackers can identify where someone works, learn about their role and contact them through a personal phone that may sit outside corporate monitoring. An employee's private number can therefore provide another route into the business through impersonation and social engineering. Alex also makes a persuasive case for collecting less personal data. Personalization can improve a service, but every additional piece of information becomes something an attacker might obtain during a breach. His advice is to identify the minimum information needed to deliver the intended experience rather than gathering data simply because it may prove useful later. Despite the seriousness of the threat, Alex offers evidence that coordinated action can produce results. He has seen brand-impersonation campaigns reduced from tens of millions of calls each month to around 100,000 through monitoring, disruption and cooperation between businesses and telecommunications providers. If AI is making fraudulent calls harder to recognize, should businesses stop treating the telephone network as a trusted communication channel by default? Listen to the episode and share your thoughts with me.
July 17 · 27 min
Why AI Agents Fail in Production: TrueFoundry CEO on Building Reliable AI Systems
Why do AI agents and applications look impressive in demos but struggle when companies try to deploy them in production? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Nikunj Bajaj, co-founder and CEO of TrueFoundry, about why enterprise AI has become a systems problem, what companies need to move AI from proof of concept to production, and how better infrastructure can improve reliability, governance, security, observability, and cost control. Before founding TrueFoundry, Nikunj worked at Meta on conversational AI systems serving more than a billion users and contributed to the company's internal machine learning platforms. He explains how developers at Meta could concentrate on solving business problems while infrastructure handled logging, monitoring, deployment, and governance by default. In many enterprises, the same journey from an AI idea to a production application can still take weeks or months. Nikunj argues that increasingly capable AI models are not necessarily the biggest barrier to enterprise adoption. The harder challenge is building reliable systems around them. Companies need to know what happens when a model becomes unavailable, how an agent is behaving, which data it can access, how much it is costing, when a human should intervene, and whether there is a kill switch when something goes wrong. We discuss why AI proofs of concept often fail when exposed to real users. Controlled demonstrations rarely reproduce production conditions such as unexpected prompts, malicious actors, heavy workloads, model outages, latency, and dependencies between multiple components. Even when individual parts of a system perform reliably, combining them can create failure rates that businesses cannot accept for mission-critical workflows. The conversation also examines the infrastructure required as companies introduce multiple AI models and agents. Nikunj explains the roles of model gateways, MCP gateways, and agent gateways, and how bringing these components together through an AI gateway can give enterprises a control plane for observing and governing AI traffic. Cost is another major challenge. Nikunj explains why sending every request to the most powerful model can waste significant amounts of money when smaller or cheaper models could produce comparable results for simpler tasks. Intelligent model routing can help companies balance quality, latency, availability, and price. He shares how organizations using this approach have reduced model costs by as much as 75 to 80 percent in some production environments. We also discuss what reliable multi-agent systems require in practice. Companies need clearly defined boundaries for what agents can do, escalation routes to other agents or people, safeguards against infinite agent loops, and complete audit trails of interactions and decisions. For CIOs, CTOs, AI engineering teams, platform leaders, and companies trying to move generative AI and agentic AI into production, this conversation provides a practical guide to the infrastructure decisions that determine whether AI applications remain impressive prototypes or become reliable business systems. The next stage of enterprise AI will not be defined by models alone. Companies that can connect, observe, govern, secure, and control their AI applications while managing costs will be better positioned to turn experimentation into dependable production systems.
July 16 · 25 min
How Front is Helping Companies Cut the Hidden Coordination Costs Slowing Customer Service.
What if the biggest barrier to better customer service isn't how quickly employees work, but how much time they lose coordinating with everyone else? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Kevin Yang, Head of AI at Front, about why customer conversations are becoming a valuable source of business intelligence, how AI can improve work across entire teams rather than simply making individuals faster, and the hidden coordination costs affecting customer operations. Kevin brings a unique perspective to the conversation. Before joining Front following its acquisition of his AI voice-of-customer company, Syllable, he spent 15 years as an entrepreneur. While building an office food delivery business, he experienced firsthand how customer conversations could reveal problems that traditional surveys and dashboards failed to identify. By analyzing customer feedback at scale, his team could connect specific issues directly to retention, account growth, and referrals. Today, AI makes it possible for companies to analyze enormous volumes of customer conversations and turn unstructured feedback into intelligence that can inform decisions across product development, sales, marketing, and customer success. Kevin shares how Front analyzes conversations to understand why deals are lost, why customers leave, and which topics are associated with higher sales conversion rates. The result is a feedback loop that helps companies direct product investment toward problems customers genuinely care about while giving sales and marketing teams a clearer understanding of the conversations that influence buying decisions. But the episode also challenges the assumption that giving every employee an AI assistant will transform productivity. Front's Coordination Tax research found that teams can spend almost three hours coordinating work for every hour spent solving customer problems. When a single customer request requires input from sales, finance, support, operations, or external systems, employees can lose time to emails, Slack messages, meetings, handoffs, and information searches. Kevin explains why making one person faster does little to solve this problem if the rest of the workflow remains fragmented. The bigger opportunity is to use AI across end-to-end processes, automatically handling research and analysis while allowing people to concentrate on work requiring judgment, empathy, relationships, and human decision-making. We also discuss the growing use of AI agents in customer operations and why governance becomes harder as companies move from experimenting with one agent to managing many. Kevin outlines the need to measure whether agents follow processes correctly, understand customer satisfaction, identify where failures occur, and continuously improve the knowledge and guidance available to AI systems. For business and technology leaders considering where to apply AI, Kevin offers a practical starting point. Map the work your teams perform into three categories: tasks AI can automate, tasks AI can support with human review, and tasks that should remain human. This helps companies focus investment where AI performs well rather than forcing automation into customer interactions that depend on empathy, context, and relationships. For anyone responsible for customer experience, AI strategy, operations, or digital transformation, this conversation provides practical ideas for turning customer conversations into business intelligence, reducing coordination friction, designing better workflows, and introducing AI agents with greater visibility and oversight. The opportunity is not simply to make individuals work faster. It is to redesign how work moves across the organization so employees spend less time coordinating and more time solving the problems that matter to customers.
July 16 · 22 min
How PwC is Helping Companies Prepare for a World Where AI Agents Become Customer
What happens when your next customer is represented by an AI agent that can research products, compare prices, evaluate suppliers, negotiate terms, and make purchasing decisions? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Ian Kahn, Partner and Customer and Commercial Excellence Platform Leader at PwC, about the rise of the Intelligent Customer Edge and why companies need to rethink how they sell, market, price, serve customers, and compete as artificial intelligence changes the buying process. Much of the enterprise AI conversation has focused on helping employees become more productive. Ian argues that this overlooks a much bigger change already taking place. Customers are using AI to research products, compare alternatives, evaluate pricing, and make decisions. In some consumer and business markets, AI agents are already being given permission to make routine purchases. Companies are no longer selling only to people. They increasingly need to serve customers whose AI agents expect accurate product information, transparent pricing, availability, service history, and performance data that can be discovered, verified, and understood by machines. This creates a serious problem for companies operating with fragmented front offices. Marketing, sales, pricing, commerce, and customer service have traditionally operated as separate functions, each with its own technology, data, processes, incentives, and performance measures. Customers do not experience companies through those internal structures. They expect consistent information and relevant experiences across the entire relationship. Ian explains why adding AI to each department independently will not solve this problem. Companies risk making existing processes faster without improving the customer experience or business performance. Instead, he argues that leaders need to reconsider the operating model behind the entire customer journey. The Intelligent Customer Edge is PwC's approach to bringing these commercial functions together into a connected system centered on the customer. Powered by proprietary company data and AI, the system can continuously learn from customer interactions, support real-time decisions, and help companies respond to changing customer needs. We also discuss the idea of the commercial brain and why proprietary data could become one of the most valuable competitive advantages available to companies adopting AI. Most businesses already possess customer records, transaction histories, operational information, market signals, service interactions, and other data their competitors cannot access. Yet much of that information remains fragmented across systems and departments. Ian explains how connecting these sources can create an intelligence layer that informs pricing decisions, marketing activity, sales opportunities, service interactions, and the moments that matter throughout the customer relationship. For CEOs, chief customer officers, marketing leaders, sales executives, CIOs, and technology teams, the conversation offers an important lesson about AI transformation. The companies achieving meaningful results are not starting with the technology. They begin with customer outcomes and redesign the work, decisions, workflows, and operating models required to achieve them. Human judgment remains an important part of that model. AI can process large amounts of information, identify patterns, provide recommendations, and handle routine tasks consistently. People continue to bring judgment, creativity, empathy, relationship-building, and strategic decision-making to customer interactions where trust and context matter. Ian argues that the goal is not to choose between people and AI. Companies need to design customer systems that use the strengths of both, determining where automation can improve speed and consistency and where people can create greater customer and commercial value. Trust, governance, explainability, and accountability also become more important as AI agents are given greater authority. Rather than treating guardrails as barriers to adoption, Ian explains why companies should design controls into AI-enabled customer processes from the beginning. The conversation also examines the cost of waiting. Customers are already adopting AI, and businesses that continue relying on fragmented front-office operations risk falling behind competitors capable of responding faster, providing better information, and creating more relevant customer experiences. Ian offers practical advice for companies deciding where to begin. Start with the customer journey. Understand how customer behavior is changing, identify where friction exists, determine how AI could improve the experience, and establish clear measures for customer outcomes and business value before investing heavily in new technology. For business and technology leaders under pressure to deliver growth, improve margins, control costs, and demonstrate returns from AI investment, this conversation provides a practical framework for redesigning the front office, using proprietary data more effectively, preparing for AI agents as buyers, and creating better customer experiences. Your customers are already using AI. Some AI agents are already making purchasing decisions. The question for companies is whether their customer systems, data, commercial models, and operating structures are ready to compete for business when the buyer on the other side of the transaction is no longer always human.
July 15 · 22 min
Elastic Reveal Why AI ROI Depends on Search, Retrieval and Decision-Grade Visibility
Why are companies investing heavily in AI, analytics, and data platforms while business leaders still struggle to see what is happening across their operations quickly enough to make confident decisions? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Massimo Merlo, Vice President for UK, Iberia, and Italy at Elastic, about why the next stage of enterprise AI adoption will depend less on who deploys the most advanced models and more on which companies can give people and AI systems access to relevant, trusted, and secure information when decisions need to be made. Massimo describes the problem as a lack of decision-grade visibility. Most large companies are not short of data. They have spent decades building data platforms, analytics systems, dashboards, cloud infrastructure, and reporting tools. Yet information remains fragmented across departments and applications, insights arrive too late, and employees often struggle to find the small amount of information that matters among enormous volumes of data. The result is a growing gap between having information and being able to act on it. Massimo explains why simply adding an AI model to this environment does not solve the underlying problem. If an AI system is connected to fragmented, outdated, poorly governed, or irrelevant information, it can produce convincing answers without providing reliable business outcomes. The quality of an AI model matters, but the context available to that model increasingly determines whether AI becomes a useful business asset or an operational liability. This leads to one of the biggest technology conversations emerging around enterprise AI: context engineering. Massimo explains how context engineering provides AI systems with the relevant data, tools, permissions, organizational knowledge, and guardrails required to complete a task safely. Rather than sending ever-larger volumes of information to AI models, companies need infrastructure capable of retrieving the right information and making it available at the moment a person or software agent needs to act. Fraud detection provides a practical example. An AI agent evaluating a transaction needs more than access to a powerful model. It requires customer history, behavioral patterns, company risk thresholds, permissions, compliance requirements, and the ability to recognize activity that falls outside normal behavior. Without that context, the system could block legitimate customers or approve fraudulent transactions while presenting its decision with complete confidence. We also discuss why digitally mature companies can still struggle with real-time decision-making. Massimo shares lessons from Elastic's work with organizations including Reed, the Met Office, and Rightmove, explaining why having sophisticated technology systems does not automatically make a company context mature. Information can still remain trapped between applications, teams, and databases, preventing employees and AI agents from seeing the complete picture when it matters. The conversation challenges another long-standing enterprise technology habit: adding more dashboards. Massimo explains why dashboards often provide visibility into what has already happened without helping people decide what to do next. Companies can continue adding reporting layers while employees become overwhelmed by information and remain unable to identify the actions that will improve customer experience, productivity, security, or business performance. A healthcare example demonstrates what becomes possible when companies solve this problem. Massimo shares how CogStack at King's College Hospital brought together unstructured patient information during the COVID-19 pandemic and made it searchable using natural language processing. Clinicians could find relevant information without waiting for technical teams to build new queries or systems, helping medical professionals access information when patient decisions needed to be made. For CEOs, CIOs, CTOs, data leaders, and technology teams trying to improve AI ROI, Massimo offers practical advice on where to begin. Do not start with another model, tool, or dashboard. Start with a business decision or workflow that is currently too slow, unreliable, or difficult to execute. Identify what information that decision requires, where the data is stored, who or what system needs access to it, which permissions should apply, and where information currently becomes delayed or disconnected. That process can reveal the visibility gaps preventing companies from turning their existing data and AI investments into measurable results. We also examine why search and retrieval are becoming infrastructure concerns for companies introducing AI agents. As software agents begin making recommendations and taking actions across business systems, their performance will depend on whether they can securely retrieve relevant information at scale. For business and technology leaders facing pressure to demonstrate returns from AI investment, this conversation provides a practical framework for improving enterprise search, context engineering, AI agent reliability, real-time operational visibility, and decision-making. The companies that gain the greatest value from AI may not be those collecting the most data or deploying the most models. They will be the companies capable of finding what matters, understanding its context, and getting trusted information to people and AI systems quickly enough to act on it. That is where better visibility can become better decisions, stronger productivity, and business growth.
July 14 · 17 min
Why Business Intelligence Has Been Hiding Inside Your Agreements
What if one of the biggest obstacles to digital transformation isn't your technology stack, but the agreements connecting it all together? Recorded live at Docusign Momentum in London, this episode continues my conversations from the show floor by looking at one of the most overlooked challenges facing modern organisations. Companies have spent years investing in CRM platforms, ERP systems, HR software and cloud infrastructure, yet many of the agreements linking those systems together still rely on manual processes, email chains and static documents. Joining me is Stéphane Barberet, President of EMEA at Docusign. Having spent more than three decades helping organisations across Europe use technology to improve the way they work, Stéphane shares why he believes agreements have become one of the biggest blind spots in enterprise transformation and how AI is beginning to change that. We discuss why organisations are starting to view agreements as business intelligence rather than administrative paperwork, where businesses unknowingly lose value after contracts have been signed, and why removing friction from everyday workflows often delivers greater returns than simply introducing another AI tool. Stéphane also explains why organisations across financial services, healthcare, manufacturing and many other industries are all asking the same questions about AI, how leaders should approach adoption without trying to automate everything at once, and why measurable business outcomes matter far more than launching ambitious AI programmes. Throughout our conversation, we also explore how executives should measure success, what separates organisations making genuine progress from those still experimenting, and why the future of AI may be one where the technology becomes almost invisible, quietly improving the way businesses operate every day. After spending the day speaking with customers, executives and attendees at Momentum, one message kept coming back to me. The organisations creating the greatest value from AI aren't chasing the latest trend. They're solving meaningful business problems, building trust and helping their people spend more time on work that truly matters. Where do you see the biggest opportunities to remove friction from the way your organisation works? I'd love to hear your thoughts after listening and continue the conversation.
July 14 · 27 min
How Endava is Helping Companies Turn AI Investment Into Measurable Business Value
Why are companies spending heavily on AI tools while struggling to show meaningful improvements in productivity, revenue, or business performance? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Matt Cloke, Chief Technology Officer at Endava, about what it takes to become an AI-native business, why deploying thousands of AI licenses does not amount to an AI transformation, and how companies can move from experimentation to measurable business outcomes. Matt has played a central role in Endava's own adoption of artificial intelligence and the development of Dava.Flow, the company's methodology for applying AI throughout the technology delivery lifecycle. With more than 11,000 employees and clients operating across multiple industries, Endava has treated itself as "client zero," testing AI internally before advising other companies about how to introduce it across their operations. Matt shares the story of a CEO who proudly told him that his company had completed its AI transformation after purchasing 10,000 licenses for an AI tool. Twelve months later, the business had seen little return on its investment and returned for help understanding what becoming AI-native actually required. The story captures one of the biggest problems with enterprise AI adoption today: buying technology is easy, but changing how people think about problems, redesign workflows, and create business value is much harder. We discuss why Matt believes becoming AI-native is primarily a mindset. Rather than treating AI as another application added to the technology stack, employees should become curious about where AI can improve existing processes, remove unnecessary work, and create new ways of delivering value. Matt also explains his idea that AI works best when it becomes invisible. Instead of requiring employees to constantly interact with chatbots and standalone AI applications, software agents can operate inside existing workflows, monitor information, prepare responses, identify problems, and bring people into the process when human judgment is required. His own use of AI agents provides a practical example. While attending meetings that prevented him from monitoring email for several days, Matt used agents to review incoming messages, redirect requests, identify urgent communications, and prepare draft responses. Rather than handing complete control to automation, he determined which actions required approval and where AI could operate independently. This leads to a wider discussion about human oversight and accountability. Matt argues that managing AI agents may increasingly resemble managing teams. Leaders do not inspect every decision made by every employee, but they establish responsibilities, controls, escalation points, and circumstances where intervention is required. Companies introducing agentic AI need similar approaches to supervision. We also examine two mistakes Matt frequently sees companies make. The first is treating AI adoption as a software rollout, buying tools for employees and expecting productivity gains to appear automatically. The second is creating centralized AI centers of excellence and expecting a small group of specialists to determine how every department should use the technology. Matt argues that employees closest to business processes are often best placed to identify opportunities for improvement. At Endava, the legal team runs monthly AI hackathons to redesign its own workflows, supported by technology specialists but led by people who understand the work itself. For companies operating in payments, financial services, and other regulated industries, the conversation turns to reliability, auditability, traceability, and risk. Matt explains how Dava.Flow allows companies to translate regulatory requirements and operational controls into policies that AI systems must follow and demonstrate throughout the delivery process. Rather than searching for a single killer AI application, Matt recommends examining end-to-end business workflows. Companies can map how information moves between employees, departments, and systems, identify unnecessary handoffs and manual processes, and determine where AI agents can improve speed, cost, and performance without replacing entire technology platforms. Leadership is another major theme throughout the episode. Matt believes the companies that achieve meaningful results from AI will be led by executives who personally use the technology, understand its capabilities, and demonstrate the behaviors they expect from their workforce. He shares how Endava brought senior leaders from legal, technology, people, and other business functions together to build software agents themselves. The experience changed how executives thought about technology investments, including one leader realizing that an existing vendor contract might no longer be necessary because the company could build the required capability internally. For CIOs, CTOs, technology leaders, and business executives under pressure to demonstrate returns from AI investment, this conversation provides practical lessons on becoming AI-native, redesigning workflows, managing software agents, maintaining human accountability, operating AI in regulated industries, and moving beyond technology adoption toward measurable business value. The companies that succeed with AI may not be those buying the most tools or making the biggest announcements. They will be the ones whose leaders understand the technology, whose employees rethink how work gets done, and whose AI systems quietly become part of everyday business operations.
July 13 · 21 min
Cognitive Tech Debt: Is AI Making Your Workforce Faster but Less Capable?
What happens when AI makes employees more productive today but gradually weakens the expertise companies will depend on tomorrow? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Dr. Margaret Cunningham, VP of Security and AI Strategy and Field CISO at Darktrace, about cognitive tech debt, the growing risk that companies are gaining short-term efficiency from AI while unintentionally weakening critical thinking, technical expertise, problem-solving ability, and human judgment. Margaret brings a rare combination of experience to this conversation. With a PhD in Applied Experimental Psychology and a career spanning behavioral science, cybersecurity, privacy, human-centered security, and AI strategy, she examines technology adoption through the lens of how people actually think, learn, develop expertise, and make decisions. She explains cognitive tech debt by comparing it with the technical debt familiar to software teams. Companies can introduce technology quickly and enjoy immediate improvements in speed and output, only to discover weaknesses underneath those gains later. With AI, the debt may accumulate in people. Employees can appear highly productive while outsourcing the difficult cognitive work required to build judgment, recognize patterns, understand failures, and develop genuine expertise. We discuss emerging evidence that over-reliance on AI is already affecting professional skills. Software engineers may become less capable of diagnosing problems in code they did not create themselves. Medical professionals can lose decision-making capabilities when they become dependent on automated systems. Across knowledge work, deep reading and sustained concentration are increasingly being replaced by summarization, generation, and superficial review. Margaret describes the current period as the "bridge years," when AI systems are becoming increasingly capable but people still need to maintain the expertise required to recognize mistakes, question recommendations, recover from failures, and understand when automation should not be trusted. Companies cannot safely abandon human skills before technology can reliably perform those responsibilities without supervision. The conversation also challenges one of the most repeated promises surrounding enterprise AI adoption: that automation will remove routine work and allow employees to concentrate on higher-value activities. Margaret argues that companies have done a poor job of defining which tasks people genuinely want to give up and which skills they need to preserve. Some of the repetitive, slow, and difficult work being automated may be exactly where people develop pattern recognition, creativity, and professional judgment. This creates a serious challenge for cybersecurity teams and other high-stakes professions. If employees become reviewers of AI-generated outputs rather than practitioners developing expertise through experience, where will the next generation of senior engineers, security analysts, doctors, researchers, and technical specialists come from? Margaret explains why leaders need to understand which AI techniques are being used for different business problems rather than treating every form of artificial intelligence as interchangeable. Large language models, machine learning systems, behavioral analytics, and other technologies have different strengths and limitations. Knowing what questions to ask requires domain expertise, creating a difficult paradox for companies that may be automating away the very experience needed to govern these systems responsibly. We also examine the human consequences of AI adoption. Technical specialists who enjoy solving difficult problems can lose motivation when meaningful work is replaced by reviewing machine-generated outputs. Companies may struggle to understand who owns decisions made through collaboration between humans and AI, while younger employees could lose access to the experiences that previously helped people progress from beginners to experts. Margaret offers practical advice for business and technology leaders deciding how quickly to introduce AI across their workforce. Companies can identify the skills they need to preserve, create opportunities for employees to practice difficult cognitive work, use simulations and training to maintain expertise, ask teams which aspects of their jobs give them purpose, and resist pressure to automate every task simply because the technology exists. The message is not anti-AI. Margaret sees enormous potential for artificial intelligence in scientific research, cybersecurity, productivity, and solving difficult problems. But realizing those benefits requires a more intentional relationship between people and machines. For business leaders, CISOs, technology teams, AI practitioners, and anyone concerned about the future of human expertise, this conversation provides a practical framework for recognizing cognitive tech debt, deciding what should and should not be automated, preserving critical thinking skills, and building healthier forms of human-AI collaboration. AI can make people faster. The bigger question is whether companies can capture those productivity gains without losing the human capabilities they will need when the technology gets something wrong.
July 13 · 42 min
How Algorand Is Preparing Blockchain Infrastructure for the Quantum Threat.
What happens to blockchain networks, digital assets, and the wider internet when quantum computers become powerful enough to break the cryptography protecting them? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Bruno Martins, Chief Technology Officer of the Algorand Foundation, about what quantum computing means for blockchain security, why post-quantum cryptography is becoming a technology priority, and how enterprises should evaluate blockchain infrastructure for payments, digital assets, identity, and other business applications. Bruno brings experience from across several major blockchain ecosystems, including Consensys and IOHK, alongside a background in applied cryptography, key management systems, enterprise blockchain development, and software engineering. His perspective provides a useful view of how the blockchain industry has changed from experimental projects and speculative use cases toward platforms expected to support real financial transactions and business operations. We begin with the quantum threat itself. Bruno explains why the cryptographic systems protecting blockchains, financial infrastructure, communications, messaging platforms, and much of the internet could eventually become vulnerable to sufficiently powerful quantum computers. While the exact timeline remains uncertain, he argues that waiting for a cryptographically relevant quantum computer to arrive before beginning migration would leave companies with too little time to update infrastructure, applications, wallets, accounts, and user behavior. The conversation examines why post-quantum security is not simply a future technology problem. Large digital ecosystems can take months or years to migrate, and businesses need time to understand their cryptographic dependencies, introduce new standards, educate users, and build systems capable of adopting new security methods without disrupting existing operations. Bruno shares how Algorand has been working on post-quantum security for several years, including the deployment of Falcon signatures for state proofs and plans to introduce quantum-resistant account types and additional protections across consensus and network communications. We discuss why cryptographic agility may be more important than simply replacing existing cryptography with newer algorithms that have not yet experienced decades of testing in real-world systems. This leads to one of the most valuable technical lessons in the episode. Moving directly from classical cryptography to post-quantum cryptography introduces its own risks because newer cryptographic methods may later reveal weaknesses. Bruno explains why hybrid approaches, where digital assets and accounts can be protected by both established and quantum-resistant cryptography, could provide a more responsible path for institutions managing long-lived systems and valuable assets. We also examine how enterprises should evaluate blockchain platforms. With thousands of networks competing for developers, users, and institutional adoption, Bruno argues that businesses need to look beyond market attention and transaction speed. Throughput, decentralization, security, programmability, finality, operational risk, and the ability to trust the state of a ledger all influence whether blockchain infrastructure is suitable for real business operations. Payments provide a practical example. Companies issuing payment products backed by stablecoins need confidence that transactions are final and cannot later be reorganized or reversed by the underlying network. Bruno explains why instant finality can reduce operational uncertainty and risk for companies building financial applications on public blockchain infrastructure. The conversation also turns to AI agents and agentic commerce. If autonomous software agents begin negotiating, purchasing services, exchanging value, and conducting transactions with other agents, they will need payment rails, identity systems, trusted counterparties, and ways to establish ownership and accountability. Bruno explains why stablecoins, digital identity, decentralized finance, and blockchain infrastructure could become increasingly relevant as AI systems begin participating directly in economic activity. Throughout the episode, Bruno offers a balanced assessment of the blockchain industry itself. He discusses the problems created by technical fragmentation, competing standards, thousands of networks, and ecosystem tribalism. Greater cooperation between blockchain communities, particularly around wallets, hardware, cryptographic standards, and post-quantum security, could make it easier for enterprises and developers to build applications that work across ecosystems. For technology leaders, security professionals, blockchain developers, and anyone responsible for long-lived digital infrastructure, this conversation provides a practical introduction to quantum threats, post-quantum cryptography, cryptographic agility, blockchain finality, stablecoins, and the technical questions companies should ask before choosing distributed infrastructure. The quantum threat may not arrive tomorrow, but migrating complex systems takes time. The companies and technology platforms preparing today will be in a much stronger position to protect digital assets, maintain trust, and continue operating when current cryptographic standards eventually need to change.
July 12 · 31 min
Why Boring Automation Can Deliver More Business Value Than Shiny AI
What if companies rushing to deploy AI agents are overlooking the basic problem that much of their business data is still trapped inside PDFs, emails, attachments, spreadsheets, and paper documents? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Sylvestre Dupont, co-founder and CEO of Parseur, about why successful AI adoption begins with making business data usable, why traditional automation can often outperform more sophisticated AI systems, and how he built a profitable global technology company with six employees across six countries without venture capital funding. Sylvestre introduces the concept of data liquidity, the ability to move information from the documents and systems where it is trapped into the applications, workflows, and AI systems that can put it to work. Companies may have years of valuable operational data, but if that information remains buried inside what Sylvestre calls "digital concrete," even the most advanced AI models will struggle to produce useful results. The conversation examines why structured data extraction has become increasingly important as companies invest in AI agents, copilots, and automated workflows. Sylvestre explains that better models alone cannot compensate for incomplete, inaccessible, or poorly structured information. Before businesses can expect AI to automate complex processes or support better decisions, they need reliable ways to collect, structure, and move data between systems. We also challenge the assumption that every business problem now requires an AI solution. Sylvestre explains why AI should be treated as one tool among many and why deterministic automation remains the better option for repetitive processes where accuracy, consistency, and explainability matter. Parseur itself combines AI-powered document processing with template-based extraction and traditional workflow automation, using each approach where it performs best. Drawing on Parseur's experience processing more than 100 million documents annually, Sylvestre describes the different stages companies move through as they mature their automation strategies. Some begin by manually uploading documents and downloading extracted data. Others automate document ingestion and connect information directly to accounting platforms, CRM systems, and other business applications. The most advanced companies add exception handling and human review processes for situations where automation cannot reliably complete the task. Data privacy and security are another major part of the discussion. Sylvestre shares the questions technology leaders should ask before sending sensitive company information to AI-powered platforms, including where data is stored and processed, whether customer information is used to train AI models, how deletion requests are handled, and whether vendors genuinely understand the regulations and security standards they claim to follow. For founders and bootstrapped entrepreneurs, Sylvestre also shares an alternative perspective on building technology companies. Parseur has remained profitable, globally distributed, and customer-funded rather than pursuing the venture capital model of rapid expansion. Sylvestre explains why he prefers customers to determine the company's priorities, how asynchronous communication supports a team operating across multiple time zones, and why building a sustainable business can offer founders greater control over product decisions and company culture. This conversation offers practical lessons for technology leaders deciding where AI belongs in their operations, operations teams trying to reduce repetitive manual work, and founders questioning whether venture capital is the only route to building a successful global software company. The message throughout the episode is simple: AI can be extremely useful, but companies still need reliable data, appropriate technology choices, strong privacy practices, and well-designed business processes. Sometimes the smartest technology strategy begins by solving the boring problems first.
July 12 · 43 min
Why Cybersecurity Is a People Problem Before It Is a Technology Problem
Why do companies continue spending heavily on cybersecurity technology while human behavior, poor governance, and skills shortages leave them exposed to attacks? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Phil Chapman, Cybersecurity Subject Matter Expert at Firebrand Training, about what more than two decades in the Royal Air Force, signals intelligence, counterterrorism, threat intelligence, and cybersecurity education taught him about defending companies in an increasingly complex threat environment. Phil's career provides a fascinating perspective on how intelligence skills developed in military and national security environments can be applied to modern cyber defense. After 23 years in the RAF, including work supporting organizations such as GCHQ and the NSA, training intelligence analysts, and working in counterterrorism, Phil moved into technology training and cybersecurity education. Today, he helps companies understand their cybersecurity training needs while supporting people building careers in an industry that continues to need new talent. A major theme throughout our conversation is Phil's belief that cybersecurity is fundamentally about people. Technology matters, but expensive security products cannot compensate for employees who do not recognize threats, executives who misunderstand their responsibilities, or companies that treat security awareness as an annual compliance exercise. Phil explains threat intelligence in practical business terms, examining the relationship between threats, vulnerabilities, business assets, and risk. We discuss why insiders remain one of the biggest security concerns facing companies, including malicious employees and the far more common problem of accidental actions such as clicking phishing links, sharing sensitive information, or sending data to the wrong recipient. The arrival of generative AI is making these problems harder to manage. Phil discusses how criminals are using AI to create more convincing phishing campaigns, deepfakes, social engineering attacks, and other forms of cybercrime. At the same time, employees are introducing new risks by using AI tools without understanding what happens to company data or whether appropriate policies and controls are in place. But this episode is also about opportunity. Phil challenges the stereotype that cybersecurity careers are only for highly technical people sitting behind multiple screens writing code. He explains the different career paths available across cybersecurity engineering, threat intelligence, incident response, security operations, governance, risk, compliance, and analysis, and why skills from customer service, the military, data analysis, writing, communications, and other professions can transfer successfully into cyber roles. For anyone considering a career change or trying to enter the technology industry, Phil offers practical advice on where to begin. Rather than chasing advanced certifications or trying to become an ethical hacker immediately, he recommends building a strong foundation, understanding networks and operating systems, staying current with the news, developing analytical thinking, and remaining curious about how criminals adapt world events and new technologies to create attacks. We also discuss cybersecurity apprenticeships and why alternative routes into technology careers could help companies develop talent while giving people of different ages and professional backgrounds access to an industry they may previously have considered out of reach. Finally, Phil explains why cybersecurity professionals cannot focus only on today's threats. AI is already changing both attack and defense strategies, while quantum computing is forcing companies to examine cryptography, data protection, and long-term security planning. His message to business leaders and technology professionals is clear: buying more technology will not solve every security problem. Companies need informed leadership, better governance, continuous learning, practical training, and people who understand how threats evolve. This conversation offers business leaders a clearer understanding of cyber risk, provides technology teams with practical ideas for improving security awareness, and offers anyone considering a cybersecurity career a realistic view of the opportunities, skills, and pathways available through training and apprenticeships.
July 11 · 55 min
The Toothbrush Test: What Keval Desai Looks for Before Investing in a Startup.
What separates the founders who build category-defining companies from the thousands of startups that never make it through the venture capital funnel? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Keval Desai, founder and General Partner of Shakti, an early-stage venture capital firm investing in AI and space technology companies from inception. Drawing on his experience backing companies including Canva, The RealReal, and Gatik, Keval shares how he evaluates founders before the rest of the market recognizes their potential and why the venture capital industry needs to confront some uncomfortable truths about startup funding and successful exits. Keval introduces Shakti's "toothbrush" investment philosophy, an idea he first encountered through Larry Page at Google. The principle is simple: can a product or service become something used frequently by millions or even billions of people? He explains why this question helps investors distinguish impressive technology from businesses capable of creating lasting value, particularly at a time when thousands of AI startups are competing for capital and attention. But identifying a large market is only part of the equation. Keval shares three characteristics he has observed in exceptional founders. They can describe a future that others cannot yet see, attract talented people before they have money or resources, and execute at a speed that continually surprises those around them. His stories from meeting Canva co-founder Melanie Perkins and The RealReal founder Julie Wainwright offer a rare look at what investors can learn from founders at the earliest stages of company building. We also discuss Keval's thesis that AI is taking the economy into a new Imagination Era. As AI becomes increasingly capable of handling specialized tasks such as coding, analysis, and production, he believes human value will move toward imagination, judgment, taste, and the ability to combine technologies into products and services people actually want. For founders, employees, and business leaders, this raises important questions about education, careers, and what it means to build a company as access to technical capabilities becomes dramatically cheaper. Keval also compares the arrival of open-source AI models such as DeepSeek to the role Linux played in the development of the commercial internet. He explains why falling inference costs could lower barriers to building AI companies and create opportunities for a new generation of startups, while also examining what this could mean for today's dominant AI companies and the industry's economics. The conversation then turns to one of the biggest problems facing venture capital. The number of startups receiving funding has grown dramatically, yet the number of technology companies reaching public markets has remained relatively static. Keval explains why venture capital can scale dollars but cannot simply manufacture more category leaders, and why founders need to decide early whether venture capital is actually the right source of funding for the business they want to build. We also examine the commercial opportunities emerging from space technology. Keval believes the SpaceX IPO could play a similar role for space commerce to Amazon's IPO for e-commerce, by demonstrating viable business models and encouraging entrepreneurs to build new companies in communications, energy, manufacturing, infrastructure, robotics, and services beyond Earth. Finally, Keval offers an optimistic counterargument to fears that AI will leave younger workers without meaningful careers. He explains why he believes Gen Z's status as the first AI-native generation could become an advantage, why technical careers are changing rather than disappearing, and why the ability to apply AI to problems across healthcare, manufacturing, agriculture, finance, and other industries could create opportunities far beyond Silicon Valley. This conversation offers founders a practical framework for evaluating ideas, choosing investors, understanding venture economics, and building companies in the age of AI. It also provides investors and technology leaders with a broader perspective on open-source AI, space commerce, the future of work, and where the next generation of category-defining companies could come from.
July 10 · 18 min
Why Docusign Believes Agreements Are the Next Evolution of Business Intelligence
What if the most valuable business intelligence in your organisation has been hiding inside your contracts all along? Recorded live at Docusign Momentum in London, this episode explores why enterprise AI is at an inflection point. After years of focusing on what AI can create, the conversation is shifting towards how AI can help organisations understand the information they already have, remove friction from everyday work, and make better business decisions. Joining me is Allan Thygesen, CEO of Docusign. While many people still associate Docusign with electronic signatures, Allan explains why the company's vision has expanded far beyond that single moment in the agreement process. Every business runs on agreements, from customer contracts and supplier relationships to employee onboarding and partnerships. The real opportunity, he argues, is transforming those agreements from static documents into business intelligence that helps organisations improve performance, reduce risk and uncover value that has often remained hidden for years. We discuss why decades of historical agreements are becoming increasingly valuable in the age of AI, how organisations are using agreement intelligence to shorten sales cycles from days to hours, and why understanding the context behind agreements can be just as important as the agreements themselves. Allan also shares his perspective on the rise of agentic AI, explaining why trust, governance and compliance will ultimately determine how quickly organisations allow AI to take on greater responsibility. Rather than viewing AI as another standalone tool, he explains why the future lies in connecting trusted data and workflows across the systems businesses already use every day. Throughout our conversation, we also explore why Docusign continues to build an open ecosystem through partnerships with companies including Anthropic, Harvey, Legora, OpenAI, Google, Salesforce, SAP and Thomson Reuters, enabling organisations to work with agreement intelligence wherever work already happens. After spending the day at Momentum hearing from customers like Harvey, Legora, Experian and AON, executives and attendees, one theme kept emerging. The organisations creating the greatest value from AI are not necessarily adopting the most AI. They're using it to remove friction, improve decisions and help people focus on work that genuinely benefits the business. Does your organisation still think of contracts as administrative files, or are they becoming a strategic source of business intelligence? I'd love to hear your thoughts after listening and continue the conversation.
July 9 · 30 min
Your Brand Is Invisible in AI Search. Here's What You Can Do About It
What happens when your customers stop searching through pages of Google results and start asking ChatGPT, Claude, and other AI platforms which companies they should trust? In this episode of Tech Talks Daily, I speak with Kathleen Lucente, founder and CEO of Red Fan Communications, about zero-click search, AI-mediated discovery, and why producing more content is unlikely to solve the growing challenge of brand visibility in AI-generated answers. Kathleen argues that content is what a company says about itself, while authority is built through what credible third parties say about it. As buyers increasingly use large language models to research companies, compare vendors, and make purchasing decisions, earned media, analyst relations, customer reviews, executive visibility, original research, and consistent brand messaging are becoming increasingly important signals of trust. But building brand authority cannot be completed in a few weeks or solved by purchasing another AI visibility tool. Kathleen explains why companies appearing prominently in AI-generated answers often earned that position through years of reputation building. We discuss her seven-part framework for measuring brand authority across earned media, company recognition, reviews, entity coherence, content authority, social authority, and technical readiness, as well as how marketing leaders can identify where their companies are falling behind competitors. The conversation also examines what the rise of generative engine optimization, answer engine optimization, and AI search means for traditional SEO and content marketing strategies. Kathleen explains why SEO still matters but can no longer carry the entire burden of brand discovery, and why marketing, communications, sales, customer success, and executive leadership must work together to build the credibility signals that influence both people and AI systems. We also discuss how companies can measure reputation and connect communications programs to tangible business outcomes. Kathleen shares examples of original research and earned media opening doors to new customers, generating conversations with major publications, and creating commercial opportunities that traditional sales efforts had struggled to reach. Drawing on more than 30 years of experience helping B2B technology companies through IPOs, acquisitions, funding rounds, and periods of rapid growth, Kathleen explains why reputation often acts as invisible insurance for a business. Companies may not recognize its value until a deal, crisis, leadership change, or major transaction puts trust under pressure. Finally, Kathleen shares practical advice for B2B technology leaders who want their companies to become trusted authorities in the age of AI search. From auditing how your brand appears across multiple sources to refreshing customer reviews, developing credible executive voices, strengthening analyst relationships, and creating original data that journalists and industry leaders want to reference, this conversation offers a practical roadmap for companies trying to become visible in AI-generated answers. Is your company still trying to win the AI search battle by producing more content, or are you investing in the reputation and third-party credibility that will influence how both people and AI systems perceive your brand? Share your thoughts with me.
July 8 · 32 min
How Experion Technologies Is Connecting AI Agents Across the Investment Lifecycle
What happens when an industry managing more than $150 trillion is still held back by decades-old systems, manual work, disconnected data, and highly paid experts spending hours on tasks AI could complete in seconds? In this episode, I speak with Markus Ruetimann, a member of the Experion Technologies Advisory Board and former Global Chief Operating Officer with more than three decades of experience in institutional asset management, alongside Siraj Alimohamed, Global Head of Data and AI at Experion Technologies. We begin with a simple question. What does an asset manager actually do with our pensions, savings, and investments every day? Markus takes us through the investment process, from research and stock selection to portfolio construction, trading, settlement, performance analysis, and regulatory reporting. Along the way, we examine where time, money, and expertise are being lost. Siraj then explains composable AI through one of the clearest analogies I have heard. Think of building with Lego bricks rather than creating every solution from scratch. Companies can create reusable AI agents for research, risk monitoring, compliance, portfolio analysis, trade execution, and reporting, all operating on a shared data and governance foundation. We discuss how this model can change the economics of AI adoption. Siraj shares examples of AI reading hundreds of broker reports in seconds, freeing hundreds of analyst hours, reducing portfolio review cycles from days to hours, improving trade execution quality, identifying settlement risks before trades fail, and accelerating regulatory reporting. The conversation also tackles one of the most common reasons companies delay AI projects: "our data isn't ready." Siraj argues that waiting for perfect data can become an excuse for inaction. His advice is to identify two or three measurable use cases, prove their value within weeks, and use those results to build confidence and secure further investment. But technology is only part of the story. Markus explains why AI adoption in asset management is also a cultural and organizational challenge. Companies must decide which processes to automate, which to support with AI, and where human judgment must remain firmly in control. The message from both guests is refreshingly practical. Start small, start with a real business problem, connect AI systems through a common data foundation, and give skilled people more time to make better decisions. Can composable AI help asset managers respond faster, reduce costs, improve investor returns, and make better use of human expertise, or will legacy systems and cultural resistance continue to slow progress? Listen to the conversation and share your thoughts.