149 - What the Data Says About Why So Many Data Science and AI Initiatives Are Still Failing to Produce Value with Evan Shellshear
Aug 6, 2024
auto_awesome
In this engaging discussion, Evan Shellshear, an author focused on data science challenges, reveals why AI initiatives struggle to deliver value. He emphasizes the crucial disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers. The conversation highlights how human factors, such as organizational culture and communication barriers, often undermine projects. Evan argues that educating data scientists on these interpersonal skills is vital and offers insights into how analytically mature companies can foster better project outcomes. Tune in for actionable strategies!
The high failure rate of data science projects often stems from human factors rather than just technical issues, highlighting the need for better collaboration.
A significant disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers can lead to misaligned expectations, emphasizing the importance of developing communication skills in both groups.
Organizations with greater data maturity experience lower failure rates, suggesting that investing in training and aligning projects with business strategies enhances success.
Deep dives
The Importance of Group Coaching for UX/UI Design
A new group coaching service has been launched to provide teams with regular guidance on UI and UX design, product management, and overcoming organizational challenges. This service is designed to be more affordable compared to traditional consulting or training sessions, making it accessible for a wider audience. The goal is to assist teams in shipping high-value data products that stand out in the competitive market. By focusing on these areas, the coaching aims to enhance the design and usability of data-driven products.
Persistent Challenges in Data Science Projects
Despite advancements in frameworks and methodologies, data science projects continue to face a high failure rate, with estimates indicating that up to 80% do not achieve their intended outcomes. Common reasons for these failures include technical misalignment, poor data quality, and a lack of understanding of the project's goals among stakeholders. Experts emphasize the need for deeper exploration into these failures, suggesting that the root causes often stem from human factors rather than solely technical issues. Addressing these challenges requires a more scientific approach that goes beyond surface-level analysis.
Bridging the Gap Between Data Scientists and Executives
A significant disconnect exists between data scientists and executives, often due to varying levels of domain expertise and communication styles. Data scientists may not possess the necessary knowledge of the business context they are working within, while executives may lack a technical background to understand the implications of data science initiatives. This gap can lead to misaligned expectations and project failures, underscoring the need for better collaboration and training across both groups. Developing skills in areas such as design thinking and human factors is essential for fostering effective communication and understanding.
The Role of Analytics Translators in Organizations
Analytics translators serve as crucial intermediaries who possess both technical expertise in data science and a deep understanding of the business domain. They help bridge communication gaps, ensuring that insights derived from data are relevant and actionable for executives. Organizations that successfully incorporate analytics translators tend to see better project outcomes and reduced failure rates. This dual expertise ultimately leads to more strategic decision-making and effective implementation of data-driven initiatives.
Building Data Maturity for Successful Outcomes
Analytically mature organizations exhibit lower failure rates in their data science projects compared to their less mature counterparts, suggesting that building a culture of data-driven decision-making is vital. Companies can enhance their data maturity by investing in training, developing effective governance practices, and aligning data projects with overarching business strategies. Incremental growth in data capabilities helps organizations conceptualize and execute more complex projects over time, leading to measurable outcomes. Successful companies often demonstrate a commitment to understanding and addressing human factors, further supporting their analytical initiatives.
Guess what? Data science and AI initiatives are still failing here in 2024—despite widespread awareness. Is that news? Candidly, you’ll hear me share with Evan Shellshear—author of the new book Why Data Science Projects Fail: The Harsh Realities of Implementing AI and Analytics—about how much I actually didn’t want to talk about this story originally on my podcast—because it’s not news! However, what is news is what the data says behind Evan’s findings—and guess what? It’s not the technology.
In our chat, Evan shares why he wanted to leverage a human approach to understand the root cause of multiple organizations’ failures and how this approach highlighted the disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers. He explains the human factors at play, such as poor problem surfacing and organizational culture challenges—and how these human-centered design skills are rarely taught or offered to data scientists. The conversation delves into why these failures are more prevalent in data science compared to other fields, attributing it to the complexity and scale of data-related problems. We also discuss how analytically mature companies can mitigate these issues through strategic approaches and stakeholder buy-in. Join us as we delve into these critical insights for improving data science project outcomes.
Highlights/ Skip to:
(4:45) Why are data science projects still failing?
(9:17) Why is the disconnect between data scientists and decision-makers so pronounced relative to, say, engineering?
(13:08) Why are data scientists not getting enough training for real-world problems?
(16:18) What the data says about failure rates for mature data teams vs. immature data teams
(19:39) How to change people’s opinions so they value data more
(25:16) What happens at the stage where the beneficiaries of data don’t actually see the benefits?
(31:09) What are the skills needed to prevent a repeating pattern of creating data products that customers ignore??
(37:10) Where do more mature organizations find non-technical help to complement their data science and AI teams?
(41:44) Are executives and directors aware of the skills needed to level up their data science and AI teams?
Quotes from Today’s Episode
“People know this stuff. It’s not news anymore. And so, the reason why we needed this was really to dig in. And exactly like you did, like, keeping that list of articles is brilliant, and knowing what’s causing the failures and what’s leading to these issues still arising is really important. But at some point, we need to approach this in a scientific fashion, and we need to unpack this, and we need to really delve into the details beyond just the headlines and the articles themselves. And start collating and analyzing this to properly figure out what’s going wrong, and what do we need to do about it to fix it once and for all so you can stop your endless collection, and the AI Incident Database that now has over 3500 entries. It can hang its hat and say, ‘I’ve done my job. It’s time to move on. We’re not failing as we used to.’” - Evan Shellshear (3:01)
"What we did is we took a number of different studies, and we split companies into what we saw as being analytically mature—and this is a common, well-known thing; there are many maturity frameworks exist across data, across AI, across all different areas—and what we call analytically immature, so those companies that probably aren’t there yet. And what we wanted to draw a distinction is okay, we say 80% of projects fail, or whatever the exact number is, but for who? And for what stage and for what capability? And so, what we then went and did is we were able to take our data and look at which failures are common for analytically immature organizations, and which failures are common for analytically mature organizations, and then we’re able to understand, okay, in the market, how many organizations do we think are analytically mature versus analytically immature, and then we were able to take that 80% failure rate and establish it. For analytically mature companies, the failure rate is probably more like 40%. For analytically immature companies, it’s over 90%, right? And so, you’re exactly right: organizations can do something about it, and they can build capabilities in to mitigate this. So definitely, it can be reduced. Definitely, it can be brought down. You might say, 40% is still too high, but it proves that by bringing in these procedures, you’re completely correct, that it can be reduced.” - Evan Shellshear (14:28)
"What happens with the data science person, however, is typically they’re seen as a cost center—typically, not always; nowadays, that dialog is changing—and what they need to do is find partners across the other parts of the business. So, they’re going to go into the supply chain team, they’ll go into the merchandising team, they’ll go into the banking team, they’ll go into the other teams, and they’re going to find their supporters and winners there, and they’re going to probably build out from there. So, the first step would likely be, if you’re a big enough organization that you’re not having that strategy the executive level is to find your friends—and there will be some of the organization who support this data strategy—and get some wins for them.” - Evan Shellshear (24:38)
“It’s not like there’s this box you put one in the other in. Because, like success and failure, there’s a continuum. And companies as they move along that continuum, just like you said, this year, we failed on the lack of executive buy-in, so let’s fix that problem. Next year, we fail on not having the right resources, so we fix that problem. And you move along that continuum, and you build it up. And at some point as you’re going on, that failure rate is dropping, and you’re getting towards that end of the scale where you’ve got those really capable companies that live, eat, and breathe data science and analytics, and so have to have these to be able to survive, otherwise a simple company evolution would have wiped them out, and they wouldn’t exist if they didn’t have that capability, if that’s their core thing.” - Evan Shellshear (18:56)
“Nothing else could be correct, right? This subjective intuition and all this stuff, it’s never going to be as good as the data. And so, what happens is, is you, often as a data scientist—and I’ve been subjected to this myself—come in with this arrogance, this kind of data-driven arrogance, right? And it’s not a good thing. It puts up barriers, it creates issues, it separates you from the people.” - Evan Shellshear (27:38)
"Knowing that you’re going to have to go on that journey from day one, you can’t jump from level zero to level five. That’s what all these data maturity models are about, right? You can’t jump from level zero data maturity to level five overnight. You really need to take those steps and build it up.” - Evan Shellshear (45:21)
"What we’re talking about, it’s not new. It’s just old wine in a new skin, and we’re just presenting it for the data science age." - Evan Shellshear (48:15)