Tony brings over two decades of expertise in CMSs, offering unique perspectives on the evolution of DAMs, headless CMS, and the emerging role of AI in content strategy. This episode delves into the complexities of modern content technologies and offers insightful strategies for making informed choices in a rapidly changing digital landscape.
By the end of the episode, you’ll learn:
- Evolution of Content Management Systems: Understand how DAMs and CMS have evolved over the years, including the rise of headless CMS and the impact of AI
- Strategic Technology Decisions: Learn the importance of having a clear strategy and vision when choosing content management technologies
- The Future of DAMs: Explore how DAMs are expanding their capabilities, managing a wider range of assets, and playing a crucial role in the content lifecycle
- The Role of AI in Content Strategy: Gain insights into how AI is transforming content creation and management, not just at the customer touchpoint but throughout the content lifecycle
- Challenges with Headless CMS: Understand the limitations and potential pitfalls of headless CMS and the importance of hybrid solutions
- Emerging Omni-channel Content Platforms: Discover the concept of Omni-channel Content Platforms (OCPs) and how they differ from traditional DAM and CMS solutions
- Making Informed Technology Choices: Learn practical tips for navigating the complex content technology market and making decisions that align with your organization’s needs.
Also listen and download on…
In 2001, Tony Byrne founded Real Story Group (formerly CMS Watch), set out to create a new kind of research and advisory firm, one that works only for enterprise technology customers who want the real story about digital marketing and customer experience technologies.
Tony is co-author of The “Right Way to Select Technology”, which provides a practical, adaptive process that relies on realistic storytelling and hands-on testing to get the best fit for your enterprise.
Real Story Group’s vendor evaluation research has become known for its technical depth, toughness and absolute neutrality. RSG now helps large enterprises make critical decisions about their omnichannel stacks.
Full session transcript
THIS IS AN AUTOMATED TRANSCRIPT
Noz Urbina 00:07
Hello, everybody. My name is Noz Urbina, host of the omnichannelX podcast, and founder Urbina Consulting, I’m here today with Tony Byrne, founder of The Real Story Group. Tony is, is an expert in all things, content technology stack. And I’m very much looking for this conversation. I’ve known Tony for, like over a decade now, I think he’s been a speaker at omnichannel X events in the past, this is his first time on the podcast. And a lot of things have happened in the past 10 years of content technologies. So Tony, you want to introduce yourself a little bit tell tell people what you’ve been about your background?
Tony (he/him) 00:45
Yeah. Noz, great to see you and actually spend some time just riffing on these topics. I’ve been covering content management systems since the mid 90s, when I was a frustrated early implementer of them. And noticed in the by the late 90s, when there were analyst reports coming out about some of these technologies, that our experience, actually implementing some of these tools was very different than what the analysts were saying about vendors that were in the so called Top Right winners quadrant. And I thought there had to be a better way to tell the real story from an author editors developers perspective on how these technologies really worked, as opposed to how analysts said they work. And then I realized I learned very quickly that traditional analyst firms actually get paid by vendors to say nice things about them and concluded very quickly that really the only way to get real about this was to work on the on the buyer side of the table. And so that’s where we’ve been for the last two decades advising enterprises on their content and other marketing technology decisions.
Noz Urbina 01:50
Awesome. I love it. I you know, I did a lot of CMS selection consultancy work in my earlier career, but decided to move up the chain as we can, we’ll I’m sure will come out in the discussion that making the right technology decisions, you know, you have to have a strategy worked out, you know, and some understanding within the organization of why are we making this move? Why are we investigating this kind of technology at all? And so I think that I, I understand your role in this. And I totally, I think we come at it from two different perspectives, which should make an interesting discussion. So, right now, what I’m seeing as kind of big trends in the in the tech stack arena, are, I think, number one is obviously the rise of headless that’s been a big, making a big name for itself. It’s been very interesting, as someone who was in structured and decoupled systems, you know, in the late 90s, to now see this kind of new batch of headless CMS has come up and suddenly take the world by storm, as well, there’s a lot going on with DAM, I’m seeing some interesting acquisitions and some interesting functionality coming out of the DAM market. I’m also seeing more customers asking me about DAM as opposed to Content Management, or what we call traditional content management systems. So and then there’s AI, you know, so where, what what do you see as the most important trends that our audience if you’re into omni channel, that’s the omni channel, Jake’s podcast is? What where should they be keeping their eyes on the market?
Tony (he/him) 03:30
Yeah, well, I think you you mentioned at least two of those. One is the evolution of DAM. And I think that one of the things that we’re beginning to learn is that all of our contents are assets. So at some level, we should be thinking about small a asset management, whether those are images and video, which was the traditional purview of digital asset management, or narrative or even, we see a lot of data being presented as content, right. And so data sometimes becomes content. And so you need very specialized tooling to be able to handle all of that. And there is a an offshoot of the DAM marketplace that we’ve seen in the last two or three years that we call omni channel content platforms that can handle all of these different content types, but critically, are also the technical term for it is is is their object oriented, which means that they can handle all the parent child relationships and the variations that you need, if you’re going to be omni channel, if you’re going to do personalization, and if you’re going to set yourself up for AI success. And so, you know, here’s where then AI is very interesting in this world. Where is you know, one of the big blockers towards on the both omni channel and personalization was you can have a great content strategy. But if that strategy required you to execute on 40 or 50 different variants from all these different candidates, the actual production, or the execution of that strategy, you know, became very difficult and was frequently a roadblock. And so now there’s at least a promise that AI can help us by auto suggesting or auto generating all these different variants and then tracking them. And that’s obviously, it’s not the full story on AI here, but it’s part of the story is, in terms of omni channel is there’s a role for AI if you can get your component content house in order, and but you have to do that first.
Noz Urbina 05:24
Yeah, I think you raise you get me on my high horse right there? Well, because I’m always talking about how there’s too much excitement about AI, right at the customer touch point, like, how can we, you know, give our content out through AI? How can we deliver through AI, we’ll get our chat bots up and running. Whereas I think the real story, to borrow a phrase is looking at AI throughout the, throughout the lifecycle. So right up from a initial research and insight gathering, through brainstorming, and strategy development, and customer journey mapping, yeah. requirements development, then authoring all this stuff, like making this amount of content.
Tony (he/him) 06:08
Yeah, it’s so fascinating that you would say that, because we just held one of our councils. So we have this martec council of martec. Leaders at large enterprises around the world, we meet in person twice a year, we’ve just met earlier this month, at the headquarters, one of the farms nearby here in Virginia, and you know, we divide the world into generative AI insights, AI and decisioning. are predictive AI, right. And there’s often different tools that do that, and what they were what they were all telling us was that none of those can you look, you can’t look at any of those in isolation. In other words, you can generate all the variants you want. But if you don’t have insights into which variants are performing better, it’s kind of just a turkey shoot. And then you have to figure out the logic side of this, which variants are we going to show to which people at what time and why, which is its own form of
AI? And so
Tony (he/him) 07:00
there’s a there’s a whole AI lifecycle here around decisioning, generative, and then insights. And you know, we’ve been evaluating AI vendors, we’re just about to release our vendor evaluation research. And one of the things we discovered is it no single vendor is good at all three of those. So once again, the enterprise is really in a situation where you have to assemble a kind of an AI pipeline of capabilities, and not just look at generative in particular, in isolation. Yeah,
Noz Urbina 07:33
we actually refer to it as your intelligence anatomy, which is this all what are all the what is the? What are the years? What are the eyes? What are the what is the mouthpiece? What are the what is the brain and guts of your tech stack? And rather than thinking about it as like, Oh, I’m gonna get chat GVT? Where is AI going to fit in all aspects of what we’re doing? It’s by, you know, the rise of chat, GBT, it’s even in the name. It is very, it’s distracting. It’s kind of created a gravitational pull in the thinking about artificial intelligence in a certain direction, as if it’s chatbots and or being like search replacements. So so people are thinking like, you open it up and you put in queries, you ask it a question, and it gives you an answer, you give it a prompt, and it gives you a response, where as opposed to thinking about it as computing, you know, we use computers all over the place to do all sorts of different things. We don’t imagine that every aspect of our tech stack, much to the major vendors chagrin, every aspect of our tech stack is just going to be handled by one piece of software, one vendor. Why would we ever do that? With AI? It makes it makes absolutely no sense would never happen. It’s never happened before in computers, what would have happened now? So I think that the one of our one of the main issues is not the AI technologies. It’s the understanding and vision and strategy to to put them to use, people don’t know what is efficient. We’re in a chicken and egg, kind of vicious circle here, where people don’t know what AI is with the carrot capable of. They don’t have the insights of how to bake it into their workflows. And so how do you make good decision? How do you make good buying decisions about that, in that situation?
Tony (he/him) 09:27
Yeah. That’s exactly the conversations that we’re having. I mean, the good news is that the companies who are really smart about this are building their own guardrails and their own policies and procedures around this. And then having done that, let people experiment because you can’t always know in advance what this is. And people tend to learn things better if they they learned themselves and there are they can discover sometimes there are technology and vendor mismatches in terms of what you’re trying to do and what a particular event Under is really best at. And so we’re gonna we’re seeing already a lot of mixing and matching going on
Noz Urbina 10:05
that route. Good. You know, I think that’s the integration of multiple tools with different capabilities has always been the way to go. Yeah. So I mentioned what you said about digital, digital omnichannel content platforms. So you know, lest we go another year without a new acronym, where GBT in our lives this year, let’s so tell us so. So what is the omnichannel content platform, as opposed to like a viva vault or an a primo or our usual suspects?
Tony (he/him) 10:43
When we, when we first started looking at this, about five years ago, I hated the idea of yet another three letter acronym. And I hated the idea of naming a marketplace that didn’t exist, because that was never really our thing, right. But it was something that was happening, and it was real. And so we decided to give it for better or worse to give it a name, which he called omnichannel content platforms. And it was a spin off from the DAM marketplace. And a lot of big name, DAM vendors that you would recognize actually can’t do this. But there are some specialized DAM vendors that do that are looking at the bigger picture rather than just, you know, managing images and video better for brand marketers and catalogs and things like that, to really look at a broader picture where copy and narrative and data are also first class entities. And where you can manage not just component assets, but also the compounding of those assets, and understand the different derivatives. So you may have one core video, but the way that’s gonna play out in Tik Tok versus Twitter versus Facebook could be very different. You may have three derivatives, and but you want to be able to track those derivatives back to the parent and then understand where the usage is, and then bring in analytics data around how is the parent video performing as a whole across the three channels? And then how are the three derivatives performing and why and where and oh, by the way, what assets are were included within these derivatives that may or may not, you know, and you know, there’s a lot of interesting experimentation even going on with dynamic videos. That’s just one example of the complexity of this and the but the desire to really understand what’s working A and then B, based on what’s working, how can we compose different experiences for different audiences and different channels. And this is what we’ve been trying to do for 25 years and is, you know, there’s a lot of governance and execution issues holding us back from doing this. But historically, there was also, you know, the fact that you might need to use three different platforms. And so right away, that was a barrier. And so recently, we’ve been managing some RFP processes. And it was really interesting, this one that we did for a big European transportation company, and they went out to some big name consulting firms whose names you would recognize. And they said, Look, we want just one platform to do all of this to have all of our customer care information. For both agents as well as customers, we want all the classic digital asset management, we want to manage all of the component content within our within our catalog. And we want to manage our partner learning content and all this other stuff. It’s all component content, it’s all variety of different content types. We want to manage it in one place, according to one metadata regime. You know, three of the four major consultancies that they approached said, this is impossible, you cannot do this, but we’ll put together a series of of technologies that will cobbled together in one solution for you. And it turns out, they were wrong, that they were actually three finalists among software vendors that could actually do this. I can’t name who those three words are, the market has matured now, where there is such a thing as an omni channel content platform. And so this gives us hope, of course, as you know, the tool itself doesn’t doesn’t guarantee that you’ll be able to execute on this but it does create the kind of technical preconditions whereby with a with a sophisticated strategy, you can start having this kind of content Control Panel, similar to kind of the some of the data and decisioning control panels that are beginning to emerge for marketers.
Noz Urbina 14:32
Hmm, okay. So this is this is very interesting. I am agnostic to the one platform versus versus assembly, I am fine. Putting together integrated systems with multiple platforms, if that’s the best fit for the for the organization, if there is one platform that will do it. Great, even simpler. For me, the Achilles heel of dams has always been and and this is what And the reasons that I, you know, I am, I’ve always worked closely with I’ve been DAM adjacent, I’ve been mainly handling working with the people who actually have to create the content and the create the text aspects of the content. And what Dan was never been good at is managing source it. So it’s been good at managing assets. But in terms of managing what, you know, the raw materials, the I guess, the small a assets, as you put it earlier, things like text assets, managing them, and then managing the creation of them. So do you see that the dams are kind of reaching up earlier in the in the lifecycle? Or are we still going to be creating in upstream CMS ‘s and tools and then publishing our assets to manage it? Yeah,
Tony (he/him) 15:46
it really depends. Certainly, if you’re trying to be an OCP, or omnichannel content platform, you have to deal with authoring and work in progress, right? A lot of dead traditional DAM vendors are kind of snobbish about this, they have this idea, it’s now become a rather quaint idea of a finished asset, right, there’s such a thing as a finished asset. And what we’re seeing in the omnichannel world is no asset is ever, it’s never actually finished. Because they’re constantly being derived. They’re constantly being copied and or used in different places. And so this line between a finished asset and a work in process, work in progress has become super blurry. And I think a lot of DAM vendors have missed that boat, they’re still thinking back in the day of where DAM was originally created, which was creating image and video was so expensive, that you just kept the finished asset. And it was like some gold piece of gold that costs you a lot of money and needed to be managed as an asset. And there was this misperception that text was really cheap and fungible that assets were golden, and I’m fungible. And that’s just not true anymore on either count, and so it was never true. Yeah. And, and, and so see, we can’t hold on to anymore. Exactly. And so you know, that just the minute you start talking about composability, you’re talking about something that’s a work in progress, I’d like if I have a video that’s made up of some audio and transcripts, and then images and other things, and I want to track the relationships, and even maybe understand which ones are driving better performance, then I’m talking about a world of compound assets and compound, not just in the fact that there’s many of them, but there’s many different types of them from data to images. And, you know, I want to overlay a dynamic offer, which is a data element on top of a dynamic image with some dynamic text, that’s going to appear in a particular dynamic order within an email. And, you know, managing you can get there from a logic standpoint, you can you can figure out the logic to drive that. But then figuring out and managing all the piece parts that go into that gets really complicated. So we think OCPs are a step in the right direction. Okay,
Noz Urbina 18:00
so you’re these, these are things that where you would author in the actual OCP?
Tony (he/him) 18:05
Well, the OCP is where you, you could potentially author them, or you could author them upstream. The idea is that these are, these are the parts of your content that we would think of as enterprise content in that you want them to be reused or derived them or compounded in some way. So what this division of labor that we see happening is that the sort of omni channel content is being managed at an enterprise level within these. And then there’s always going to be channel specific content that can be managed in the channel. So for in a web content management system, it might be long form content, or case studies or story type content, where you’re injecting some of the enterprise content into it from the OCP. But the web content managers are managing the long form content and the ultimate, you know, experience of that. And so you know, that that’s where, and it’s the same thing in your email platform, in your E commerce platform, you’re going to have some other content that’s very channel specific that you can manage and channel because it doesn’t need to be on that channel. But anything that is more enterprise he is managed at a lower tier. And so you know, we call this sort of Pilates for your stack where, you know, everybody’s focused on getting getting looking really buff in the, in the in their upper body where they’re meeting the customer, but you better have core core muscles, or you’re not going to be you know, as as attractive as you think to the customer, or strong or strong.
Noz Urbina 19:38
Yeah, so it’s so it’s very interesting, because I get a little implication from what you’re saying that it’s still managing kind of like nuggets. They’re more flexible nuggets. So let’s come let’s let’s let’s try to make this more concrete. So I use a lot, the Lego metaphor for Component content because everyone can everyone can get that. I hate the term atomic content, I don’t think I think I’ve mentioned it on 50% of all podcast, I hate that term atomic content, it’s what’s simpler than particle physics. So I like Lego, easier to wrap your head around. So what I’ve always seen dams as being is that you know, you are out of wood, or you mold out of clay, your precious beautiful assets, and then you put them in this very functional kind of Amazon warehouse where you can get them out and deliver them very easily. But now we’re talking about not managing the finished baked clay pot, but the whole, your entire Lego set, and all the different ways that those Legos have been put together in different combinations. I’m still, so when you say like long form content in the web, CMS, it’s interesting, because some, depending on the business, that’s the stuff that they also want to manage and components, like, specifically white papers, case studies, that kind of things. Those are, those are the reusable components. And so I think we’ll, I think, I would like to delve into this. I’m very interested by this. I’m very first of all, I’m very excited, that DAM is expanding its wings, because it’s been, I think it’s been hold the the I’m gonna pronounce the oligarchy of the major DAM vendors has been holding us all back. Yeah, you know, of kind of trying to keep us in this world where manage your content, then come to us to manage your assets, that dichotomy of all of the crazy messy stuff that need we need help managing happens outside of the DAM. And then once we have our nice shiny assets, then we can manage them inside of a DAM. That separation of work, I think was always crazy. So the fact that DAM is going and taking risk, taking wider responsibility, and thinking whole lifecycle earlier and later. I think that’s fantastic. But what I’m still hearing is that for depending on what kind of content you’re making, if you’re making more text based stuff, and you have a more complex authoring process, you might still be looking at a DAM CMS integration of some kind to manage that, that the nitty gritty of the authoring bit and then put these reasonable units, even though they’re very flexible and can be still Lego together in the DAM. You might the actual authoring process, but could happen outside. So I’m interested to see where that goes. I think that there’s it’s that’s a watch this space kind of thing, which takes us takes us directly back to headless Well, whose headache all seems also seems to be offering. I saw posts from Jeff Eaton on LinkedIn recently, Jeff, Jeff’s been on the podcast several times. And I’ve been on him on his he’s for over from Otto Graham. And he kind of did an emperor’s wears no clothes post saying that a lot of these headless CMS is are little more than content databases. And then you actually have to build the CMS on top of it to get an operational. I’m interested in your thoughts on that. I have a lot of involvement in the headless market and a lot of background with this kind of system. So I’m interested in your take, which probably the fresh one for me.
Tony (he/him) 23:11
Yeah. Well, Jeff is absolutely right. I think the rise of headless has been a productive phenomenon. But it’s been way over blown. Headless is a feature. And one of the things we’ve learned in two and a half decades is you shouldn’t buy technologies just because of a particular feature. And I find that revealing that the headless vendors themselves typically sell into the technologist within an organization, you take a vendor like Contentful, they’ll just tell you what we sell to developers, and departments. I mean, they shouldn’t, these are not the people who should be making technologies, they should be contributing to technology decisions, for sure. And, you know, I can tell you stories of failed headless implementations where it just was a poor fit for our for some of the long form content, some of the page management. And so one of the things we’ve been advocating for five years or so is within a large enterprise that’s going to have a multitude of use cases, what you really want is hybrid, headless. So you want the ability for your content management system to be decoupled from whatever front end. But there are times when you also want to do bottom up or even top down page based assembly and page based curation and long form content and and the headless vendors are tend to be very bad about that. And they say, Don’t worry your little self about what it looks like. And so here we had marketers working to liberate themselves from having to turn to developers to create experiences working really hard, finally getting that capability after 15 years and now being told that it’s being taken away that doesn’t really sit very well always so headless is really a feature in any new WCM. You should look for that as a feature but it has been too much of a religious debate that religious debate has led to unnecessary religious wars. And really the answer is that you really need hybrid. And moreover, again, the scope, we believe the scope of web, CMS or WCM is narrowing, as first of all other platforms become important in your omnichannel, stack a and b, if you’re saying that the reusable enterprise components are all going to be stored at a lower level in your stack, so that they can be used across channels, then that’s one less thing that a WCM needs. So what’s happening is the scope of WCM is getting narrower. First of all, there’s other channels that you need to pay attention to. So relative to other channels, the scope of WCM is getting narrower. But secondly, if we look at WCM, is handling more long term, long form content, and website experience, and those sorts of things and that all of your reusable content and assets are being managed at a lower level in your enterprise, then the scope of what you’re asking your WCM has also become narrower. And that’s actually a good thing. Because you have an opportunity now to get a simpler solution that’s going to be right size for your stack, which typically means more agile, faster, cheaper, all that good stuff. And we’re really encouraging our clients and subscribers not to over buy in this space, but rather to right size, their WCM investments.
Noz Urbina 26:28
So this is very interesting, because I have been looking at instances where I’m looking at a headless implementation going. Really what you know, no more more along the lines of what Jeff was saying, in the sense of this is great as a repository for all of your systems to pull the eventual content from. And this will give you like this all this good, decoupled flexibility, where you can build experiences in different ways with your content that you may have never imagined when you put it together. But this thing, you’re gonna have to build a whole CMS on top of it. So why don’t we look at you know, and so this is where I kind of maybe diverge a little bit from what you’re thinking or your your position, which is, can we look at a structured based system for managing content assets, and then we can deliver that into the web CMS when kind of when they’re ready, or the or the headless CMS whatever. And because usually, the large enterprise, what we’re finding is there’s never a enterprise system, there’s maybe, maybe sometimes you got a DAM, which will be like the DAM, sometimes you get two or three dams, but content management systems and content management pipelines, they’re like mushrooms. So somewhere to single, manage, at least, you know, let’s say all of marketing, or all of, you know, all of medical science liaisons or all of you know, all of one big department, can they get all of their content assets into a single repository? And I think so that you said something very interesting, which is that the web CMS kind of still needs to be there for people to assemble the actual linear flows of the content and how things should be put together. I’m still against that, that the metaphor that for that being the page, though, because there’s lots of room for saying, Okay, well, I’m going to, I’m going to say, how I create my assets, and then I’m going to describe how I output my assets. And we’re, we’re even talking in projects where we’re talking about the input model and the output model, like you have your, how you create your Lego pieces. And then you’ve got your instruction books of how you want your Lego pieces assembled. And you have to have very robust communication in between those layers, because you can’t just create the Lego pieces in isolation, saying, I’m gonna make a brick, someday someone will make something with my bricks. Yeah, you have to have
Tony (he/him) 29:04
that page is too narrow a concept, I was using it as a shorthand. The idea is that there’s some experience on the other side of the screen, right? And that’s your answer is going to be assembled in some ways. And there’s times when you want to, you want to have that to be human curated. And there’s times when it’s going to be machine curated, and then often it’s going to be blended right. So Web, CMS is typically historically have been good at sort of human curated and mixed curated experiences, whether it’s a mobile device or a website screen or part of an application, maybe. I think, where I agree with you that structured content is belongs in its own kind of separate place. Where I part ways is that that separate place should be a headless WCM because they think that they’re good at managing omnichannel content, but they’re not because they tend to dismiss assets. As a second class citizen. They don’t manage data as content they often are. Are slavish ly relational in their information models when really need a more object oriented hierarchical model. And so attempts to convert headless CMS is into a real OCP have generally come to failure. And so what is then going to be this structured repository, I don’t think he’s gonna get headless CMS. So in a way, they’re kind of tweeners. They’re not quite this unstructured repository that they want. And they’re not a great place to assemble experiences, whatever that experience is. So what are they there are a place for managing component narratives. Okay, fine. But that’s too narrow of scope for me to justify the expense in many cases. So yeah,
Noz Urbina 30:42
it’s interesting. And I, you know, I, a lot of they’re very popular, I’m often involved in helping people work with them to get the best out of them. And that’s, that’s going to continue, I’m not seeing the headless market going away anytime soon. But, so but I don’t think we diverged there. So we agree that the headless content management, and sorry, structured content management is not the purview of your of your traditional web content management system. And trying to square that circle is been something that people have been trying to do for ages, some of the CMS has have a little bit of a better kind of argument to say that they are actually hybrid, a couple. Others just want to say, hey, sure, we can do it too, and are really just kind of slapping a thin veneer over their traditional web content management paradigms. So it’s, um, I feel like we’re leaving the audience with more questions than answers here. But that’s I think that’s the kind of market we’re in right now. That we got a lot of got a lot of movement in a lot of directions. But it’s not a clean market right now. I don’t think that there’s simple solutions, which is, I think keeps us in business. People have a lot of questions about, you know, what is the right fit for my particular situation? And there’s not, there’s not simple, straightforward answers at this market. It’s one of the most confused markets I’ve worked in, in the past 2025 years.
Tony (he/him) 32:05
Yeah, and, and one thing that I think that remains constant over the last few decades is that technology buyers face a greater risk of over buying than under buying, is it over buying ends up slowing you down. And so you have to be wary of, you know, the Adobe’s and Microsoft’s and Oracle’s and sales forces of this world who come in and say, if you just buy our heavyweight collection of different platforms that we’ve assembled by acquisitions, your life will be much easier. And that’s almost never the case. In fact, your life can be notably harder. So it’s really up to you to take responsibility for the technology decisions for business people to be very aggressive and upfront and take a product management approach, and really get the solutions that are going to work for them rather than something that somebody tells them is going to work for them.
Noz Urbina 32:53
I think that’s that’s terminology which I really, I really like and use a lot, which is telling even if you’re even if you’re a content person, whether that’s you know, if you lean more digital asset management, if you’re lean more text based, you should be thinking like a product manager, you know, what, what are the features and functions that your experience needs to be able to deliver? And what is the appropriate platform for you to live deliver that if you don’t have that worked out? You’re being sold to rather than by? Exactly, yeah, awesome. So I think that’s a, that’s a great note to end on. If you’re listening to this, and you’re feeling more confused, when you started, my apologies. But I think that’s, that’s the reality of this market, I hope it’s given you at least a good perspective to see that there are, there is a reason for you to feel confused, there is a reason for you to feel overwhelmed. There’s a lot going out there there is you know, you have to do your homework, you have to do your research, talk to people, find out what your options are, and find out what the best fit is for you. I think there’s never, never been a better time for you to say, whatever my natural assumptions are, and my first gut instinct of what to buy. This is the time to question it and do your do your homework properly. Any any, any last notes, you want to give people on your way out, Tony.
Tony (he/him) 34:17
You know, I think that we are now finally at a place where we can start thinking about enterprise components. For people and thinking about this for a long time. You know, XML was supposed to be the answer these big enterprise content management systems were supposed to be the answer. None of those quite got us to where we want it to go. I think there’s a lot of things coming together right now the omni channel imperative, the opportunities around generative AI, whatever it is still legitimate misgivings that we all have, that, you know, some of the dreams that we’ve been having for two and a half year, two and a half decades, are more achievable now than they were even three years ago. And so I’m Super excited on behalf of the enterprises that I see that are doing this, but they tend to be very savvy about the way that they make decisions and very deliberative about the investments they make. And so, you know, my wish for you is to take the time to really make some good informed choices about the technology that you bring into your enterprise. Excellent.
Noz Urbina 35:21
Okay, thank you so much. I think we’re gonna have to have you back sooner than I thought. To try to try to clarify this. I would like to read people maybe with some examples of what, like if I have this kind of content, what what kind of approach might be best, you know, little, maybe even get an unnecessarily industry specific, but really, like break down the life of some content because I find this it’s hard, you know, I find where it’s hard for people to wrap their heads around all these options. For sure. Thanks for Thanks for helping me move that discussion forward today. I really appreciate it for joining us on the show and you’ll definitely be hearing from us in the future. Thank you, everybody listening, remember to like and subscribe on whatever channel you’re on. And tell your friends. Thank you very much, Johnny. Okay, thank
Tony (he/him) 36:09
you now it’s always good to chat with you. Cheers.