1
00:00:06,0080 --> 00:00:28,0150
Welcome to the Making Sense of MarTech podcast, where we interview leaders and put them in the hot seat. I'm Jacqueline Friedman, founder of Monarch and global head of advisory for MarTech Weekly. Let's dove in and meet Natalie Miles first and a little bit about her. Natalie is the staff product manager for Marketing Technology. I grant really where she's shaping our massive volumes of data and messaging drive scalable personalized marketing.

2
00:00:28,0200 --> 00:00:53,0200
Formerly, she's the head of MarTech and personalization at Chime, which actually just went public. Congratulations. And she oversaw marketing ops at Credit Karma. She's an expert in assembling composable KPIs and building bridges between engineering and marketing teams. She's a vocal advocate for experimentation, first culture, and she even coauthored a chapter on aligning customer engagement to revenue and the customer engagement book Adapt or Die by Not Engage.

3
00:00:54,0100 --> 00:01:13,0270
So to start us off one, thank you for being here. So excited to have you. I have a personal bias and excitement because we've done the same job at Great and so I'm so happy you're here and we've got a soul sister for life. But get us started. One Thank you for being here and let's do some Rapid Fire two so I kind of get started as I.

4
00:01:14,0070 --> 00:01:15,0230
Yeah, sounds like a good plan.

5
00:01:15,0240 --> 00:01:17,0220
We always do rapid fire with each other.

6
00:01:18,0140 --> 00:01:21,0050
That is true innovation. That is just.

7
00:01:21,0170 --> 00:01:23,0240
Always in the hot seat at the time, just like what.

8
00:01:23,0250 --> 00:01:29,0040
Happened. How do I do this? It feels like we've lived the same life we kind of have.

9
00:01:29,0100 --> 00:01:30,0250
Exactly. And I am so.

10
00:01:30,0250 --> 00:01:33,0290
Grateful that you.

11
00:01:33,0290 --> 00:01:35,0260
All right? Are you a morning person or a night owl?

12
00:01:36,0000 --> 00:01:37,0120
Definitely a night owl.

13
00:01:37,0130 --> 00:01:39,0200
I wish I was a morning person. Morning.

14
00:01:39,0200 --> 00:01:53,0110
People like just have this or about them. Like they've got it together. Honestly, I work fast and I feel like when everything's calm and dead and there's no children, interrupting is when I can do like my real focus work. But we're.

15
00:01:54,0050 --> 00:01:54,0170
Always.

16
00:01:54,0170 --> 00:01:55,0060
A night owl.

17
00:01:56,0170 --> 00:02:03,0170
Same here. All right. What is your favorite martech tool that you can not work without and get specific.

18
00:02:04,0000 --> 00:02:05,0230
So a year ago, I would have just had like.

19
00:02:05,0260 --> 00:02:09,0100
A Google she like the joke of like what's the most common.

20
00:02:09,0100 --> 00:02:40,0200
Use by a marketer a CSP fail honestly chat up or clod use it for everything that's on today. I use it to outsource my thinking and decisions, but using it as a thought partner and basically treat it like a really brilliant intern who is also and if naive and dumb about something so very much still like believe in human in the loop and you know, like we need to be vibe checkers but yeah probably far and away most used tool.

21
00:02:41,0030 --> 00:02:44,0200
Okay speaking of vibes, vibe coding, yay or nay.

22
00:02:46,0050 --> 00:02:49,0110
Nay on the term, it does feel a little cringe and.

23
00:02:49,0120 --> 00:02:50,0090
Like embarrassing.

24
00:02:50,0110 --> 00:02:50,0250
To say.

25
00:02:50,0250 --> 00:03:14,0110
It. But yeah, like it's oddly addictive recently. I'm really loving, lovable, honestly. Like it's just so fun to like I've been vibe coding coloring book app for my kids. Like there's so many like applications and the ability to, you know, get out of your own head and execute on something that has lived in this like amorphous space forever is so gratifying.

26
00:03:14,0120 --> 00:03:14,0270
Like, it.

27
00:03:14,0270 --> 00:03:15,0280
Is just fun.

28
00:03:15,0280 --> 00:03:19,0270
Like, I can't remember the last time I've had fun with school before.

29
00:03:20,0010 --> 00:03:28,0260
I completely agree. And it's also like the playground in which you make and so you get to have a lot of fun there. I'm excited. There's a couple I think lot announcements happening in a couple this week.

30
00:03:28,0260 --> 00:03:30,0060
Next week. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

31
00:03:30,0110 --> 00:03:31,0260
So looking forward to it.

32
00:03:31,0260 --> 00:03:32,0250
A space. Yeah.

33
00:03:33,0070 --> 00:03:43,0060
Excited for Elena for nice touch. All the things. Yes. In particular. Okay, last rapidfire question, who is someone you admire professionally or personally?

34
00:03:43,0150 --> 00:03:46,0070
This is a difficult one. I sort of subscribe to.

35
00:03:46,0070 --> 00:03:55,0150
The like never meet your heroes because like the people who I admire professionally often don't have the personal life I admire and then vice versa, you know, obviously. Jacqueline Friedman.

36
00:03:56,0150 --> 00:04:01,0250
Okay. Like, let me just say, like, yeah, I. I am so eternally grateful.

37
00:04:01,0250 --> 00:04:02,0180
Everyone, you know.

38
00:04:02,0180 --> 00:04:03,0260
Like how wonderful.

39
00:04:03,0260 --> 00:04:17,0120
You are to work with and like, again, thank you eternally for like setting me up for this role I grammarly and, and like giving me the ins and outs. Like, I always trust your opinions. Like, yeah, like, thank you.

40
00:04:17,0130 --> 00:04:19,0250
Right back at. I wish I actually got to work together.

41
00:04:20,0050 --> 00:04:22,0020
So we got to work together on.

42
00:04:22,0100 --> 00:04:24,0190
The education piece of how to do two things.

43
00:04:24,0210 --> 00:04:26,0240
Yeah. Two ships passing each other night.

44
00:04:27,0050 --> 00:04:39,0270
You know, other people. I would say I admire professionally. I had the privilege of working with some really great marketers at Credit Karma. In some ways it spoiled me and made me think marketing was something that maybe it's not.

45
00:04:39,0280 --> 00:04:40,0290
Just like such an.

46
00:04:40,0290 --> 00:05:11,0250
Amazing credit. Karma circa 2016 to 2020 was just like a really special marketing award. Like we had an amazing CMO and Greg well, like really amazing marketing leadership. The amount of CMO's that came out of that credit, karma marketing cohort is really impressive. And so yeah, like learned a lot. It was a really great place to really learn marketing and like what marketing should be like, very data driven in my mind, very low ego, very experimentation.

47
00:05:11,0250 --> 00:05:15,0270
Focused is like it sounds like an incredible incubator. Ultimately it.

48
00:05:15,0270 --> 00:05:16,0140
Was. Yeah.

49
00:05:16,0230 --> 00:05:33,0010
That's awesome. All right. This is my personal favorite question to ask whenever I'm hiring. And it immediately tells me if it's someone that would work on my team or in the greater team. So what is your biggest effort? Because I've got plenty, so let's hear it.

50
00:05:33,0120 --> 00:05:35,0120
Yeah, there's like efforts.

51
00:05:35,0120 --> 00:05:37,0160
That were, like, very valuable learning.

52
00:05:37,0170 --> 00:05:43,0290
Opportunities, minds, just kind of things that were so funny or better. Oh, gosh.

53
00:05:44,0060 --> 00:06:05,0130
So I have recently joined Chime and at the time, you know, as you do, and it's sort of like a scrappy environment, you wear many hats. And so I was also wearing a lifecycle marketing hat and being in the financial services space. You know, we send a lot of transactional emails, especially, you know, change in terms type emails and so like every lifecycle myself.

54
00:06:05,0130 --> 00:06:06,0280
Little or just.

55
00:06:07,0060 --> 00:06:08,0000
Like we.

56
00:06:08,0000 --> 00:06:25,0150
Never want to send those emails but we got to. And so like in the habit of like compliance or legal comes to you with this boilerplate change in terms agree that you need to blast everyone with like sometimes you got to see it up. Sometimes, you know, you just ship it out the door because you got more important things to do and no one raises.

57
00:06:25,0150 --> 00:06:26,0290
This is a situation where.

58
00:06:27,0000 --> 00:06:40,0160
Like, yeah, we had to set it up and then we sent it to our entire addressable audience and it turns out one of the phone numbers in there, because you always have to have like some number and these compliance emails it went to not chime but a sex hotline.

59
00:06:42,0140 --> 00:06:42,0260
And.

60
00:06:43,0080 --> 00:06:44,0290
Oh my goodness.

61
00:06:45,0130 --> 00:06:52,0250
And that fortunately. No, I'm good. What do you mean? It's like, oh, sure. Well, one person did okay.

62
00:06:53,0130 --> 00:06:55,0280
And that person emailed you immediately.

63
00:06:55,0280 --> 00:07:09,0020
And so it turns out like and to be fair, this was also posted on our website and the compliance person like, you know, oh no, the Q way failed all across the board. It was sort of like game of telephone.

64
00:07:09,0020 --> 00:07:16,0250
We were like, you know, we got it from one place and then handed over to the next person. Then they handed over the lesson learned when you're queuing your emails, also.

65
00:07:16,0260 --> 00:07:19,0060
Queue the phone numbers and make sure that, yeah.

66
00:07:19,0270 --> 00:07:30,0120
That's amazing. And also a really great case for why you should never have a no reply. That isn't un not monitored and it's not a real email. Yes. How quickly did you guys discover the situation?

67
00:07:30,0120 --> 00:07:33,0100
So, I mean, it's not like you blew up on social.

68
00:07:33,0100 --> 00:07:34,0110
Media or anything.

69
00:07:34,0110 --> 00:07:37,0180
But yeah, it was certainly embarrassing when we found out.

70
00:07:38,0020 --> 00:07:42,0160
That's fair. Also, just like such a great reminder of a as a team is for.

71
00:07:43,0120 --> 00:07:50,0060
Right yeah the retro on that was in like you know there's always that temptation that want to point fingers and blame everyone else and.

72
00:07:50,0160 --> 00:07:52,0020
No one wants to take ownership.

73
00:07:52,0090 --> 00:08:00,0250
Yeah. Like lifecycle wanted to blame compliance. You know, like compliance was like, well, you know, I'm the fifth person.

74
00:08:00,0250 --> 00:08:02,0000
Who.

75
00:08:02,0000 --> 00:08:15,0120
Was in charge of this. And, you know, at the end of the day, like last mile, we're the ones sending out the email. Like we should take responsibility and make sure like all the I's are dotted and t's across.

76
00:08:15,0120 --> 00:08:18,0010
I agree with the caveat of receipts.

77
00:08:18,0190 --> 00:08:18,0260
Yeah.

78
00:08:18,0270 --> 00:08:21,0110
And the rules of.

79
00:08:21,0130 --> 00:08:24,0150
There were a lot of eyes on this. Before we click send.

80
00:08:24,0150 --> 00:08:31,0150
I think that like the other valuable part is like of course this was a rush job. Like all these like change in terms emails often are that's where all.

81
00:08:31,0150 --> 00:08:33,0130
Of them happen, that's where the mistakes happen.

82
00:08:33,0130 --> 00:08:46,0290
And so like, you know, there's always the opportunity cost of like, you want us to ship this quickly, mistakes are going to happen. And so I think that the real outcome was like we need at least 24 to 48 hours for you know, decent Kua.

83
00:08:47,0050 --> 00:08:53,0080
That at least was a good lesson learned. Yeah, some good came of it and maybe some extra traffic to.

84
00:08:53,0100 --> 00:08:53,0160
Sort.

85
00:08:54,0150 --> 00:08:57,0010
Of open some people's eyes.

86
00:08:57,0070 --> 00:08:59,0040
I wish I remembered where it went to.

87
00:08:59,0270 --> 00:09:01,0190
Oh yeah. Maybe quite the plug.

88
00:09:01,0280 --> 00:09:02,0070
Yeah.

89
00:09:03,0010 --> 00:09:20,0020
Speaking of mistakes, I don't think there's any mistakes. I think things are always learning opportunities in some capacity, and that's not me being positively optimistic. But have you ever had to deal with reversing a martech decision that was major? And what were the signs? What were the reasons and what did you learn from it?

90
00:09:20,0190 --> 00:09:33,0170
Yeah, I mean, I think that that's the the nature of the job. I mean, like we've all broken up with thunder. Is it because, like, we all get told promises that don't pan out in reality? I mean, salespeople lie.

91
00:09:33,0170 --> 00:09:35,0190
I know. I mean, wow.

92
00:09:35,0270 --> 00:09:42,0250
Maybe they don't necessarily lie, but everyone's, you know, business model is different. Everyone's workflows are different.

93
00:09:42,0260 --> 00:09:45,0120
Like it stretches the truth in different ways.

94
00:09:45,0220 --> 00:09:47,0040
Yeah, yeah, yeah.

95
00:09:47,0100 --> 00:10:09,0150
We all have different needs. Recent situation, like we had a breakup with a vendor. I mean, partly some of this is, you know, on me and the or again understanding what the strategy is. So like we're going all in on personalization. I think personalization and always kills me a little bit. But you know, from a strategy standpoint, what exactly do we want to do.

96
00:10:09,0150 --> 00:10:09,0240
With.

97
00:10:09,0240 --> 00:10:42,0030
Personalization? And we were trying to move so fast we onboarded a personalization tool to personalize copy. We successfully implemented it. At the end of the day, did it have an impact on growth and metrics we care about? Not really, because it turns out optimizing a subject line is only going to get you so far and probably what we should have done more due diligence on was understanding the underlying pricing model because when it came time to renew, it just wasn't very scalable to our life.

98
00:10:42,0030 --> 00:10:51,0260
Wasn't there. And so, you know, we spent all this year like developing this tool, integrating it into our workflows only to find out, you know, it's not really impactful and this isn't something we.

99
00:10:51,0260 --> 00:10:52,0150
Can continue.

100
00:10:52,0160 --> 00:11:04,0120
To invest in. So I had to pull the plug. And also it turns out coffee is very commoditized right now and it is your tool is only doing that and is a single use SAS product. Like, you know, how much remote?

101
00:11:04,0140 --> 00:11:29,0040
Yeah, there's a lot of breaking down of notes lately. Some two very interesting approaches to say, yeah, all right, I want to get into nitty gritty because you, I think, in my opinion, are one of the very few has overseen extremely high volume sending not just Grammarly, but at Chime and credit karma. And there's very few people who've been able to navigate and also succeed in that space.

102
00:11:29,0180 --> 00:11:48,0050
What is the biggest challenge you've experienced or you see when you're scaling in audience and segmentation and deliverability at such scale where we're thinking, I'm going to say at least a starting line of at minimum 5 billion emails a year. I'm scared. Yeah, we have worked up our numbers. I'm very curious also.

103
00:11:49,0050 --> 00:11:50,0200
Yeah, I mean, depends which.

104
00:11:50,0200 --> 00:12:22,0110
Channel to like. The lifecycle scale looks very different from a paid marketing scale where we're often like measuring that in terms of and there's always, you know, the martech line like always the need to get our data house in order. I mean, that's even more true when you're working at scale where, you know, you've got large marketing teams and they often become siloed definitions or metrics, underlying business logic change, and then suddenly, like, we don't know what data we're activating.

105
00:12:22,0130 --> 00:12:24,0180
I don't think anyone can relate to that at all.

106
00:12:25,0130 --> 00:12:26,0130
Right. And so this is a.

107
00:12:26,0130 --> 00:12:33,0230
Very universal problem. Like, I mean, maybe if you're a small, scrappy startup or a slow primary, you know, exactly like every single field and like the two.

108
00:12:33,0230 --> 00:12:34,0170
Tables you have.

109
00:12:34,0170 --> 00:13:02,0160
But like for most of us, like, you know, data hygiene and standardization is usually a challenge. Data activation becomes that much harder when you're working with massive amounts of data. You've got thousands of tables, thousands of events with unclear taxonomy or standardization. So that's certainly like one of the challenges to solve. Or I will say though, like there's also a bit of a myth too, that of like having perfect data.

110
00:13:02,0160 --> 00:13:24,0220
Like no one's data is perfect. I think the biggest challenge though ends up being more people, because what often happens is that companies of a certain scale, marketing orgs of a certain scale, oftentimes we start adding on products or new verticals and we hire marketers to be in charge of those specific products or verticals, and they work in these silos and isolation of each other.

111
00:13:24,0220 --> 00:13:59,0060
And so take the lifecycle example. We're still like oftentimes emailing the same addressable audience across the board. So let's say you got a 20 or 30 person marketing team. What ends up being the challenges, all of this overlapping targeting and how do you prevent things like email fatigue? Because we're sending, you know, a product offer, for one thing, to the same user and a different product offer because, you know, from an organizational standpoint, we've just decided to, you know, this team is in charge of driving this outcome for this product and this team is in charge of driving this outcome for this product.

112
00:13:59,0060 --> 00:14:18,0160
And we don't think about the tragedy of the commons that happens when we email all of our users too often. So a big part of that is like, how do we solve for this organizationally, I do think, especially in the lifecycle world, there's a huge need for having that sort of third party referee, whether it's a marketing ops person or whatever title you give it.

113
00:14:18,0280 --> 00:14:38,0060
Their job is air traffic control from a manual standpoint, whether it's and this becomes very hard to do when you're doing hundreds and thousands of campaigns. But understanding, like at a very high level what's in flight and sort of like very rough targeting. And then I'd say, like, you can start to do more programmatic solutions on top of that.

114
00:14:38,0060 --> 00:15:02,0020
And so that's where things like ML Solutions become very valuable. So kind of karma, this was a massive problem we had where we had a lot of different verticals. We were sending billions of emails often to overlapping audiences. And so one thing we found was like, hey, even just having like a personalized frequency model, how do we, you know, everyone's tolerance at a11 user level for how many emails they want to receive is going to be different.

115
00:15:02,0140 --> 00:15:21,0210
And so how can we make sure we're sending the right number of emails to the right user so that we prevent churn? And yeah, like that was not to say it was an easy solve, but this was like circa 2017, 2018 before it was super hot. And so like these solutions have been in place for a while now.

116
00:15:21,0210 --> 00:15:30,0210
And so yeah, it's a combination of, I'd say manual people operations as well as more programmatic, often ML based solutions are sure.

117
00:15:31,0020 --> 00:15:53,0240
Okay, aside from email, you're extremely well versed in the world of CDP use and I'm a big fan of them as well. And so we were actually first introduced by our mutual friend Helga Marsh of the Humans of MarTech podcast and I was also a guest. And so he's just the best human special shout out to him. We love our Canadian friends here in the States.

118
00:15:54,0270 --> 00:16:20,0120
In in your episode you did with him, you championed warehouse native, composable CPUs, but also noted latency issues one let's let dove into that and how do you decide what needs real time delivery versus batch processing. And also, I know pretty much every CDP CDP is working towards that real time quote unquote. I know I still don't fully believe it.

119
00:16:20,0120 --> 00:16:23,0170
And also, I'm kind of a skeptic in general, but I want to hear all your thoughts.

120
00:16:23,0170 --> 00:16:47,0190
Yeah. I mean, you know, I would say it depends on the use case and it depends on the channel. So take lifecycle as an example and specifically email. It's a very asynchronous channel and so there should be like a really compelling business case for why we need real time data and especially controlling for we don't actually know when the user is actually going to open and engage with the email.

121
00:16:47,0190 --> 00:17:07,0000
So, you know, even if we do manage to trigger this email in real time, are they going to open it and see it in real time? Maybe, maybe not. If you've also figured out some time optimization, maybe, maybe not. Obviously, there are some use cases where you do want your real time like password resets or sign up confirmation emails, abandoned cart, probably a good thing.

122
00:17:07,0000 --> 00:17:10,0100
But for things like engagement or resurrection.

123
00:17:10,0160 --> 00:17:11,0020
And especially.

124
00:17:11,0020 --> 00:17:31,0220
Think about like why we're sending an email to begin with. Often it's you know, if we think about like resurrection use cases, right? Like they're already outside of the product. Like are there other channels where we're already interfacing or engaging with? If not, we're doing sort of a channel waterfall approach and then resorting to email like, you know, maybe it doesn't need to be real time.

125
00:17:31,0230 --> 00:17:54,0140
The other part too is if it is truly based off of a behavioral trigger, those tend to be better near real time use cases than like, Hey, we need to send like this nurture series or this win back campaign. Like, what did they actually do to initiate this? You know, the other thing I would say is from an orchestration standpoint, like where is the campaign orchestration happening?

126
00:17:54,0140 --> 00:18:00,0090
So for lifecycle, you're probably using some ESP like a breeze or iterable to send out.

127
00:18:00,0090 --> 00:18:01,0110
The campaign as.

128
00:18:01,0110 --> 00:18:20,0040
Well. Not all of that data needs to come from your warehouse via composable CDP like you can also real time stream events. But the challenge there is it is then often hard to enrich those events with additional customer attributes that you might have in your warehouse. And this is where I would love for someone.

129
00:18:20,0160 --> 00:18:24,0070
To solve for that. Like, Yeah, you can change the world.

130
00:18:24,0070 --> 00:18:28,0040
Please create a solution here. Natalie and I will be very happy.

131
00:18:28,0040 --> 00:18:28,0210
If High.

132
00:18:28,0210 --> 00:18:50,0160
Touch, I think, has come out with something recently. I haven't had a chance to investigate it. I do think like this is top of mind for a lot of people. Like how do we solve real time personalization? I think the first question is, do you actually need a software real time personalization? I do think there's a ton of need, especially on web and in product experiences and the solutions there I've been pretty unsatisfied with so far.

133
00:18:50,0160 --> 00:18:52,0180
Underwhelming to say, yeah, yeah.

134
00:18:52,0180 --> 00:19:19,0130
And like it still gets you in this very like segmented persona based model of personalization. I'd say it's still very hard to do that. Like we all aspire to that, like Netflix level personalization. Like you log in and you see, you know, movie recommendations and even the actual content cards are like dynamically created to, to like engage with you and based off of who you are and your history like that is very hard to do.

135
00:19:19,0130 --> 00:19:41,0000
And I don't know if there's like any good third party tools that can deliver on that just yet. We'll see. I'm sure like someone's working on that. But yeah, I mean, depending on the channel, depending on the use case, warehouse native gets you very far if anything else, like going back to data hygiene and data standardization, it solves for a lot of that versus a lot of the traditional off the shelf.

136
00:19:41,0000 --> 00:20:01,0130
CDP is where you're just recreating data that already exists in your warehouse. It's also very expensive because you're paying for that additional storage costs and then of course, like you're actually going to end up with like misalignment. You know, what is the data source of truth? Is it in that third party CDP, or is it in your station tables, in your data warehouse somewhere?

137
00:20:01,0230 --> 00:20:08,0040
So like from that standpoint, I think the data warehouse or warehouse native approach solves a lot of those problems.

138
00:20:08,0040 --> 00:20:08,0180
I agree.

139
00:20:08,0180 --> 00:20:20,0040
It will be interesting to see if someone is able to resolve like how do we do real time and then streaming and enrich it with the data that's already in your customer 360 or data warehouse. So someone please solve for this. I'm waiting.

140
00:20:20,0070 --> 00:20:35,0180
I have a feeling it's coming. And so kind of in that same vein, speaking of predictions within a composable space, where do you see the next 2 to 3 years going, especially now that our decisioning is more of a prominent option? I'm curious what your headset I mean.

141
00:20:35,0220 --> 00:20:36,0150
CDP.

142
00:20:36,0160 --> 00:20:37,0250
As a category space.

143
00:20:37,0260 --> 00:20:43,0270
Has been very fuzzy in general. So first off, there's been this trend of like everything is converging into CDP. It's like.

144
00:20:44,0050 --> 00:20:46,0040
Everything's a360.

145
00:20:46,0040 --> 00:20:46,0250
AI.

146
00:20:47,0070 --> 00:21:02,0040
Everything's trying to be a CDP, but going back to it, like I think Composability is more important than ever, especially in the world of Agent IC AI and with software development costs going down to, you know, quite cheaply.

147
00:21:02,0040 --> 00:21:02,0110
Like.

148
00:21:02,0190 --> 00:21:22,0280
The build versus buy calculation has probably started to shift quite a bit. And so why would you buy an off the shelf solution with all these bells and whistles that you don't really need? So the Composability piece is going to be more important than ever because people are going to have more opportunity to pick and choose the things they actually need for their business needs.

149
00:21:23,0000 --> 00:21:25,0050
Composability will continue to be a trend.

150
00:21:25,0050 --> 00:22:01,0230
Everything is going to converge into a CDP. I kind of hate CDP as a category space because like personalization, it means everything and nothing. At the same time. You talk to data engineering their concept of what a CDP is, it's very different from a marketer going back to why Composability is important is like when we talk about CDP and you break it down to its core components, you know, often it's maybe data ingestion, data storage, data transformation, and then data activation like which CDP service are we actually talking about and honing in on going back to the like, what is the actual CDP?

151
00:22:01,0230 --> 00:22:20,0170
Is it your warehouse? Is it your data activation tool? It's just like a very confusing name and jargon that we don't need. And as tools like ISP's become CBP's like what does it even mean to be a CDP at this point? Like which part of the data value chain and data orchestration and activation value chain are they solving for?

152
00:22:20,0180 --> 00:22:34,0220
Is it that the data transformation part? Is it data activation? So yeah, like again, composability I think will be more important because what we're really trying to solve are the various different services that CDP is are meant to solve for one.

153
00:22:34,0220 --> 00:22:57,0280
Hundred percent agreed in that one. CDP is super fuzzy. It's always been fuzzy. The first time I encountered CDP as a concept and then did a demo with a very large vendor at the end of it, I still had absolutely no idea what was said. Yeah, I was the most technical person on the call. Yeah, and that's not a good look when you can't even explain what your product does.

154
00:22:57,0280 --> 00:23:13,0110
Well. And so whenever I'm talking to folks about CDP, I always have to level set and ask, What are you thinking of? Yeah, I think of CDP because often times it's a pie in the sky concept or it's truly just one singular use case and they don't need a CVP. Yeah, but it's all so dependent. Yeah. I mean.

155
00:23:13,0110 --> 00:23:37,0010
Even from like a B2B sales standpoint, like who's their ICP or ideal customer profile? And it's hard to solve for when it's this like amorphous bundled solution. Is it data engineering? Is it marketing? It's very hard to sell marketers, especially in scrappy or startups like the value add of the CDP from like a campaign owner or a campaign operator.

156
00:23:37,0010 --> 00:23:41,0010
Like what is this actually solving for me? Like, it's actually like very difficult to sell.

157
00:23:42,0120 --> 00:24:02,0110
It is. And that's where I've found the most success. Whenever I've had to build business cases or champion on behalf of folks, it's hey, this is a tool that's not going to just serve marketing because I think any and everyone knows the feeling of I hate the concept of like the marketing stink where it's just like, oh, it's just marketers sending pretty little emails over these things.

158
00:24:02,0190 --> 00:24:25,0030
No, in reality, we're actually making transformational campaigns that can really do something and move the needle. And we're the largest are a Y bringer of things like ACH is spending all the money to get folks in, but we have to keep them as receipts. Okay. And so I found great success where not only are you supporting and empowering marketing, you're empowering sales, product engineering.

159
00:24:25,0030 --> 00:24:44,0160
I was it all the mixture of variables and ingredients are different at every company and depending on your business model. But the more you're able to make a tool multi-purpose and a Swiss Army knife, not only is the business case easier, but the understanding of how everyone's going to use it in a different way, but in a singular same way at the same time, makes the sell a lot easier.

160
00:24:44,0160 --> 00:24:51,0020
And I think that's the missing component for both internally selling, but also externally with vendors too.

161
00:24:51,0040 --> 00:25:19,0280
Yeah, that's why I'm also very bullish on the warehouse native CDP or composable CDP approach really because like you look at a lot of the off the shelf CDP is they're very much in service of marketing use cases. If you think more broadly, data activation is not just the purview of marketing. The same data that powers all of our buy dashboards that finance uses or product uses like that should be the same underlying data we use to build audiences in marketing.

162
00:25:20,0060 --> 00:25:24,0040
And that should all start with our source of truth, which is in the warehouse.

163
00:25:24,0060 --> 00:25:30,0150
I mean, we should have a standardized understanding and definition of everything across every department. What do you.

164
00:25:30,0150 --> 00:25:30,0290
Mean?

165
00:25:31,0040 --> 00:25:39,0080
I mean, that might be wishful thinking. It's a good and aspirational. It's aspiration. And what we got there, I don't know.

166
00:25:39,0080 --> 00:26:02,0200
I mean, astride is strike. You know, you got to take five steps forward to get four steps back, but you're still a step forward. All right. Shifting gears slightly, you kind of mentioned about building versus buying in this current sphere of potentially bad coding or just reduce engineering costs. It's my favorite age old question, but I'm curious from your perspective, because I know you've worked with in-house homegrown solutions as well.

167
00:26:02,0200 --> 00:26:11,0130
You invest internally or do you go with a third party? Like what is your approach to deciding when to pivot between one or the other? Very serious and yourself.

168
00:26:11,0140 --> 00:26:13,0190
Yeah. I mean, even before.

169
00:26:14,0030 --> 00:26:37,0220
The emergence of generative, I still say like the dichotomy between build versus I. It's never been either or. It's always been a little bit of both. Like even when you buy a third party solution, you still always need developer solutions to to build the integration to connect it to your data. So there's always like a component of build with buy, like we're never going to get away from it.

170
00:26:37,0240 --> 00:27:11,0020
Talked about this before but you know like depending on the company I, you know, often engineering and developer resources are often your most precious resources. And most of us don't have the luxury of working at a company where we have dedicated developers or engineers, especially, to help solve marketing use cases. And so unless what you're building internally ends up being a core capability that you can ship externally.

171
00:27:11,0020 --> 00:27:21,0080
And my point of view, like historically, it hasn't really been worth it to build. I can say like as someone who has worked with a homegrown CRM tool before, it's not very fun.

172
00:27:22,0130 --> 00:27:25,0290
And it's not reliable. I mean, it's so gratifying to you from.

173
00:27:26,0090 --> 00:27:57,0080
Like a campaign operator lens. Partly like often the UI or UX lags a little bit. You know, if you think about like an iterable or braze, these are massive companies that have engineering resources specifically focused on making this like a delightful I mean, maybe that's a stretch, but making these, like, usable tools that were seamless, right. A little bit harder to replicate internally if like the CRM tool is just sort of an afterthought.

174
00:27:57,0080 --> 00:28:19,0050
And so like from a fintech lens, like the question I would always throw out like, you know, are we a fintech company or are we an ad tech company? Like, do we want to be spending our engineering resources, building internal marketing and ad tech tools when we could be focused on building core product capabilities that will provide a better user experience overall?

175
00:28:19,0050 --> 00:28:23,0270
And so that's historically been my perspective. I do think we're very much in flux.

176
00:28:24,0140 --> 00:28:25,0150
If Sam Altman's.

177
00:28:25,0150 --> 00:28:29,0010
Right and we're already at the start of the singularity, I don't know what's going to happen.

178
00:28:29,0010 --> 00:28:31,0250
But like where MCP is come.

179
00:28:31,0260 --> 00:28:32,0190
Into play.

180
00:28:32,0190 --> 00:28:34,0120
Yeah, all of the above.

181
00:28:34,0250 --> 00:28:37,0040
Right? You know, the cost of.

182
00:28:37,0040 --> 00:28:59,0280
Building internally may have just changed dramatically. I mean, are we going to be able to vibe code our way to a workable CRM tool? I haven't seen that quite yet. What I would hope is like an intermediary step is even when we buy these internal tools, interoperability is still a massive problem. Data hygiene is still a massive problem.

183
00:29:00,0090 --> 00:29:20,0210
I think there's a ton of opportunity to solve this first using a gigantic AI, basic core gen AI capabilities before we start like using a cursor or a windsurf to like replicate that third party tool. Like let's start with like, hey, like the martech paradigm has always been around. Like how do we get our tools to talk to each other and connect with each other?

184
00:29:20,0210 --> 00:29:25,0200
We still haven't solve for that. And so like if we can start there, that would be a great place to start.

185
00:29:26,0040 --> 00:30:00,0180
Would be well. And I also think of the longer term consequences, not just of building it in-house, all of the potential tech debt and things you've already mentioned, but also from a skillset hiring standpoint, if we're not on some aspects of standardized platforms and tools, the transferable skills, obviously they're there. But it's hard to recognize from a hiring perspective, oh, that person has used marketing, cloud and iterable so they understand scale and personalization and complexities versus not a dish that MailChimp or any of the smaller ESPs.

186
00:30:00,0260 --> 00:30:26,0030
It's a different capacity and understanding and level of technicality. And you won't be looking for someone who has five years of match up experience. You bring on omni channel, multi-channel step in the same capacity. And so it's by no means a standardized test because I don't those are not even acceptable in their own regard. But it is a barometer for understanding who you're working with and what they're capable of.

187
00:30:26,0160 --> 00:30:35,0220
And so there's so many question marks, even if we get it to be a reasonably priced, then how do we know folks can actually handle what they're supposed to be in charge of?

188
00:30:35,0220 --> 00:31:02,0190
Yeah, I mean, that's also just the reality of the hiring market. Everyone wants a plug and play employee who has experience working with the exact tech stack that, you know, this brand may have. Yeah, you see that a lot with people who've worked at Metta where they're very focused on internally built solutions. You know, like you hear a lot of grumblings from employees where like it becomes harder to sell that experience externally when they're on the job market, for sure.

189
00:31:02,0240 --> 00:31:24,0150
And they're not alone. Airbnb and Lyft also. I mean, each one of those companies also has an instance of one of the major platforms for very specific use case and of department. But when you have all these internal tools, it gets harder for observability and alerting when things go wrong because you might not have the mechanisms in the same capacity if it was your primary product that lots of top tier.

190
00:31:24,0200 --> 00:31:48,0160
All right. As previously mentioned and the very beginning of the episode, you were part of million pages, adapter time book and one I was really excited to see your name there and also Graham release name there. And so what you discuss there is that there's so many tech players, part of every tech sector. And how do you consider and think through a North Star metric that aligns both engagement signals but also bottom line impact?

191
00:31:48,0160 --> 00:32:11,0130
Yeah, I mean, that's always tough. Like how do you find that thing that unites everyone? And like we talked about before, like everyone's kind of chasing silos and optimizing for different outcomes, which you know, creates incongruent and fragmented user journeys and experiences. So like on one hand we're all sort of optimizing for LTV, but you can't optimize for LTV.

192
00:32:11,0130 --> 00:32:36,0290
It's not it's too big of an indicator to actually activate and operationalize. What you want to find are sort of those proxy metrics and signals that indicate someone is going to become LTV or the interventions and experiments you're designing have an influence on long term LTV and retention curves. And so what you usually want to find is one in each to be time bound.

193
00:32:36,0290 --> 00:33:02,0040
And that time amp should align with sort of the natural frequency or cadence of the product. So Grammarly as an example, like very much oriented around daily active users because people rate on a daily basis something like, you know, an Airbnb, the natural frequency of that product is going to be much longer because how often are people in the market to buy a vacation rental?

194
00:33:02,0100 --> 00:33:25,0210
And so one that time AMP should align with how users should be engaging with the product. The other part is the the actual metric that you're measuring or optimizing for should connect to some business value or tell you that users are getting some kind of business value out of this. So, you know, like going back to the or the ride share example like an Uber, right?

195
00:33:25,0210 --> 00:33:46,0190
Like you would do like number of rides completed or within the context of Grammarly number of suggestions accepted. That tells us that someone's getting value out of the product and we'll continue to use it and is less likely to churn. Yeah, I mean, what I would say Reforge has some amazing frameworks around how to arrive at your North Star metric.

196
00:33:46,0250 --> 00:33:58,0240
Alina Verna, who I think is both of our heroes, like also has a lot of great content on how to come up with their Northstar Metric. I think what's important is when you do come up with that Northstar Metric, making sure everyone's.

197
00:33:58,0240 --> 00:33:59,0220
Roadmaps.

198
00:34:00,0030 --> 00:34:28,0030
Actually roll up to those Northstar metric outcomes versus everyone chasing their own independent outcomes. And so what often happens is marketing is choosing sort of surface level channel level engagement even within product, right? We're often chasing specific growth, funnel outcomes. And if we want that cohesive experience, we need to make sure it's still rolling up into that Northstar metric that's highly correlated with long term retention and LTV.

199
00:34:28,0080 --> 00:34:52,0130
And I totally agree. I also think there's such unrecognized value in actually having company wide goals that every single thing you do ladders into that and I definitely have seen the failures where there maybe is in a really risky sort of company wide goal. There's more departmental goals which a lot of times contradict each other. Yeah, and it's not to the benefit of really anyone but the employees, customers.

200
00:34:52,0130 --> 00:35:21,0290
You name it. Yeah. And when you're in a very cross-functional role like MarTech, when you have myriad stakeholders that you're trying to keep happy, that's especially challenging to operate in because how do you prioritize against opportunities and initiatives from lifecycle versus paid versus end product? Even within lifecycle, often lifecycle spans the gamut of multiple growth funnels. And so even there it becomes difficult to prioritize against different outcomes.

201
00:35:22,0070 --> 00:35:33,0240
So you need a northstar metric to normalize the outcomes of those initiatives so that you can actually and think through opportunity cost and make sure you're working on the most impactful thing.

202
00:35:33,0240 --> 00:35:53,0000
And it gets more complicated if you aren't just A straight B to C or B to B business, if you're a, B to C to B or B to B to C, it gets real muddy real quick. And that's why the juicy stuff, the fun stuff is, but also the harder uphill battle as well. All right. I want you to dream up your most ideal martech stack.

203
00:35:53,0110 --> 00:36:16,0110
You're working at a brand new high volume company and you are solely in charge building the stack because nothing exists. Yet they've got such product market fit. So many folks are on it outside of, you know, logging in, everything is in product. What is your dream scenario set of tools? And maybe you can do two options of each category if you want to spice it up, have some options, but I want to hear what you would dream of.

204
00:36:16,0200 --> 00:36:19,0040
Yeah, I mean, one data warehouse.

205
00:36:19,0170 --> 00:36:22,0140
Is out there. I don't mean on martech, you know.

206
00:36:22,0270 --> 00:36:24,0240
Argue. It's partially definitely.

207
00:36:24,0240 --> 00:36:46,0290
Like a modern cloud based data warehouse, databricks or snowflake, to be honest. Like, I don't have skin in the game for either one, but like worked with both are the ones good enough on top of that, a reverse ETL or data activation tool? I'm a big fan of high touch for what it's worth. Like when I love their content, I think they have some of the most forward thinking content around MarTech.

208
00:36:46,0290 --> 00:37:11,0230
I think they were very forward thinking as far as the shift from the traditional ISP's to the composable CDP space. So a reverse ETL tool like a high touch or census on top of your data warehouse, I assume there's probably some lifecycle channel because it's always good to have a direct line of communication with your users. So certainly an easy, probably a braise or an edible.

209
00:37:11,0230 --> 00:37:47,0230
Again, like either one I think is probably going to get the job done. CMS certainly like I'm a big fan of the headless CMS is. So a content for experimentation is an interesting space. I've seen a lot of success with home grown experimentation tools. There are some like interesting experimentation platforms out there. Static is interesting. That said, like I would love to see a third party experimentation tool that like really like one of the things to solve for with experimentation is making sure user assignments and bucketing truly centralized.

210
00:37:47,0230 --> 00:38:13,0120
I still see this all the time where like you onboard an experimentation tool and marketers are still setting up experiments and user assignments outside of the experimentation tool in their ISP or you know, using some other tool to do like randomization. And so then you end up with like a lot of data interference and, you know, issues with like not being able to isolate like which experiment intervention actually drove like the outcome.

211
00:38:13,0120 --> 00:38:26,0180
Yeah. I mean to be honest, like hate advertising, I think that's going to be very dependent on the type of business and business model you need to figure out which networks, where you have channel marketing, you know, depending on your.

212
00:38:26,0180 --> 00:38:27,0210
Audience, your customers.

213
00:38:27,0210 --> 00:38:51,0020
Are. Yeah, exactly. So, you know, obviously like all the major ad networks, but like take it or leave it based off of like who your users are and like where you're most likely to find and engage with them. But yeah, what I'm really excited about too is like, how do we start building a more AI native or a AI growth native infrastructure and tech stack?

214
00:38:51,0020 --> 00:39:17,0150
And by that I mean like how can we start using, you know, MCP servers to connect all of our tools? Like there's still going to be like myriad little third party tools that we're probably using on top of these major platforms. Again, like how can we do a better job of connecting all of them to make sure we're truly sharing the same audiences, that we can truly orchestrate these cross-platform journeys, which is still very difficult to do.

215
00:39:17,0160 --> 00:39:25,0040
I think like that's going to be the exciting and emerging new development that we see in MarTech stacks in the next year or two.

216
00:39:25,0040 --> 00:39:46,0290
A great I think that's the biggest unlock and we all just have to start experimenting, but also with the big asterisks of there's no regulation, there's no formalized ethics or even moral code around where privacy is in place. So there's definitely a lot of risk mitigation involved with that experimentation.

217
00:39:47,0170 --> 00:39:54,0200
And how do you see the MCP connection with HubSpot? Like on the one hand, like it looks super cool. On the other.

218
00:39:54,0200 --> 00:39:57,0150
Hand, like, I don't know.

219
00:39:58,0250 --> 00:40:11,0110
Like having some agent interface with all of your CRM data and then potentially taking action, which in this case is like sending an email to you like your entire user base, like little high risk.

220
00:40:12,0170 --> 00:40:17,0260
Yes, without a doubt. I think it's one of those you want to be an early adopter, but you don't want to be the first adopter. You don't.

221
00:40:17,0260 --> 00:40:18,0120
Want to be the.

222
00:40:18,0120 --> 00:40:19,0040
First one to fail.

223
00:40:19,0040 --> 00:40:22,0260
Epically. Yeah, exactly. Well, it's.

224
00:40:22,0260 --> 00:40:37,0160
Kind of like you don't want to be your ISPs. Largest volume center is you're the reason things are going to break. You don't ever want to be that number one dog in that regard. But yet on the same page. Okay. To wrap us up, who else should we have on the podcast?

225
00:40:38,0000 --> 00:40:44,0260
Oh, well, obviously we need to do it. It's manifest. It.

226
00:40:44,0260 --> 00:40:55,0180
Keith Jones from Open Air. He was on Phil's podcast recently and like you had a lot of really interesting takes. I think he would like.

227
00:40:55,0250 --> 00:40:56,0170
I love to.

228
00:40:56,0170 --> 00:41:03,0050
Talk or hear his perspective on the future of the MarTech stack. Anyone from Credit Karma marketing is great.

229
00:41:03,0090 --> 00:41:04,0220
Sounds like I need some introduction.

230
00:41:05,0010 --> 00:41:05,0220
I'm happy.

231
00:41:05,0220 --> 00:41:10,0050
I'm happy to make some intros, although like they may not be like Credit Karma anymore. I need to like.

232
00:41:10,0100 --> 00:41:10,0130
This.

233
00:41:10,0150 --> 00:41:20,0170
Find in stalking. I think we need to get some like who's really dialed into the h a.k.a space right now and separating leisure. What is hype and theoretical?

234
00:41:20,0240 --> 00:41:22,0190
What is fact versus fiction like?

235
00:41:22,0190 --> 00:41:39,0100
What can we actually do right now? Especially like what can we operationalize today? Because I think it's still really hard to figure out in this space what is like still aspirational versus I can make this initiative in my upcoming quarterly.

236
00:41:39,0100 --> 00:41:48,0260
Roadmap 100%. Agreed. Thank you much, Natalie, for being on here. Where can folks and you and learn more hear more of your hot takes?

237
00:41:49,0040 --> 00:41:49,0180
Hmm.

238
00:41:50,0090 --> 00:41:52,0190
Well, I did just vibe code my own website.

239
00:41:53,0230 --> 00:41:55,0060
Oh, you want to plug it?

240
00:41:55,0190 --> 00:41:57,0250
Yeah, like everyone you should be doing that.

241
00:41:58,0110 --> 00:42:02,0130
You put your own website, it's like nothing else. Like it's good for.

242
00:42:02,0130 --> 00:42:18,0280
Your own brand. It's good, like, exposure to some of the tools out there. So I have the domain. Natalie Miles dot me. Hopefully you can remember that or else can you find me LinkedIn? Although I'm not the best, LinkedIn's gotten like very noisy. So, you know.

243
00:42:19,0150 --> 00:42:20,0090
There are.

244
00:42:20,0190 --> 00:42:21,0250
Apologies for contributing.

245
00:42:23,0060 --> 00:42:23,0290
And then I'm often.

246
00:42:23,0290 --> 00:42:27,0290
At it like a lot of the are tech industry thing so you know feel free to say oh.

247
00:42:28,0020 --> 00:42:30,0050
Well thank you so much for being on the pod.

248
00:42:30,0060 --> 00:42:33,0090
Yeah, my pleasure. Always a pleasure speaking with you, Jacqueline.

249
00:42:33,0210 --> 00:42:36,0120
I appreciate you.