Aug 31, 2021
When Jen Stirrup speaks, she speaks softly. The meaning of her words, however, speak loudly! Jen is CEO of Data Relish, a UK-based consultancy that delivers real business value through solving all manner of business challenges. You don't earn the nickname the Data Whisperer without knowing a great deal about Business Intelligence and AI. Jen certainly knows not only those topics, she knows SO much more!
References in this episode:
Episode Timeline:
Episode Transcript:
Rob Collie (00:00:00):
Hello friends. Today's guest is Jen Stirrup. Jen and I have had one
of those long-running internet friendships that are so common these
days, especially in the data world and in certain communities. But
we've also had the opportunity to meet in person several times at
those things that we used to do called "in-person physical
conferences." She's an incredibly well-seasoned veteran of the data
world, but if you're expecting us to be talking about things like
star schema and DAX Optimization, that's not really what we talked
about. You know that our tagline here is "data with the human
element," and we definitely leaned into that human element in
today's show. Now, we do talk about some of the important human
dynamics about data projects. For example, how the business
intelligence industry kind of lost its way in the past and forgot
that it's all about improvement and how we're as an industry waking
back up to that today.
Rob Collie (00:00:54):
We also talked about the value of having even one signature success
in a large organization that other people can look at to become
inspired. And she has some very interesting and well-founded
semantic opinions about terms like "data-driven" and why maybe,
"data-inspired" is better. Similarly, she prefers the term "data
fluent" to "data literate", and she explains why. But we also
touched repeatedly on the themes of ethics and inclusivity in the
world of data. Now, I have a personal idea that I haven't really
shared on this show before that I call "radical moderation." It's
the idea that you can be polite, you can be reasonable, while at
the same time advocating for sharp change. Now, this is personally
what I would like to see emerge in our political sphere, for
instance, a form of polite radicalism. We need to change, but we
need to be nice.
Rob Collie (00:01:52):
There aren't many readily available examples that I could point to
if I wanted to show you "this is what radical moderation looks
like." But now if someone asked me for that, I can point them to
this conversation we have with Jen. She is soft-spoken, she is
polite, she is open-minded, including the open-mindedness that she
might not always be correct. And yet, underneath all of that, is a
very firm conviction that we need to be better. And I think that's
the best introduction I can give this because I don't want to spoil
anything upfront. So, let's get into it.
Announcer (00:02:28):
Ladies and gentleman, may I have your attention please?
Announcer (00:02:32):
This is the Raw Data By P3 Adaptive Podcast, with your host, Rob
Collie, and your co-host, Thomas you know. Find out what the
experts at P3 Adaptive can do for your business. Just go to
p3adaptive.com. Raw Data By P3 Adaptive is data...with the human
element.
Rob Collie (00:02:56):
Welcome to the show, Jen Stirrup. It is such a pleasure to see you
again, virtually, talk to you. I'm really glad we were able to do
this So, thrilled to have you here.
Jen Stirrup (00:03:06):
Thank you so much for having me. I'm glad we made it work in the
end. Diaries, schedules, everything else, but I'm really glad to be
here and it's great to speak to you.
Rob Collie (00:03:15):
I know bits and pieces of the Jen Stirrup story and I know bits and
pieces of what you're up to. How do you describe yourself on your
LinkedIn profile?
Jen Stirrup (00:03:23):
So I would describe myself as really trying to help people make
their data better. I've just finished a post- COVID data strategy
for a healthcare organization in the US and in the UK. The reason
I'm doing that is to try and have a big impact. I believe in that,
I think COVID has brought around a real stress and a lot of
technical architectures, and a lot of data architectures as well,
and there're all sorts of pressures. So I've just finished that,
which has been a nice piece of work. I've been working with a
religious organization on their data as well. A lot of people are
accessing their services as part of a recovery from COVID. I think
it's been a very difficult, challenging time for a lot of people in
terms of mental health, and I like to think that by solving these
problems you're actually helping people, in a way to contact, some
of whom you may never meet, but that's okay. That's really what I
like to do, I think, it's a way of connecting, I think.
Rob Collie (00:04:22):
We subtitled the show 'Data With The Human Element,' you think of
the data field is like this cold, analytical, sanitary, and it's
not, right? If you're doing it right, you're having an impact in
the human plane, and it's a leveraged impact because you can really
sort of touch a lot of people's lives via the central hub that is
data. And you've got to keep the human beings in mind, even to be
successful at the quote-on-quote "cold, calculating data stuff." If
you don't keep the humans sort of first and foremost in your mind,
you're not going to design, for example, a good data strategy, like
what you just finished.
Jen Stirrup (00:05:02):
That's right. So I believe that the information ladder is quite
important. So we start off with data, then we need to turn that
into information, but then we need to turn it into knowledge and
then wisdom. And I think COVID has taught us many things. I think
it's maybe taught us a sense of purpose, it's something that can
help drive all of us. Data can be part of that and I think that
data in some ways has been replacing some of the bigger-purpose
questions that perhaps we should ask ourselves more often as human
beings. With artificial intelligence, particularly, I'm finding
that people are replacing data with, perhaps, information,
knowledge, or wisdom and say "what does the data see?" and that's
fine, but we have to have the context to the data as well.
Jen Stirrup (00:05:47):
I think in some ways with artificial intelligence, what people are
trying to do is build a little box of data and it's becoming this
oracle that people are going to touch and say: "So, what does the
data say?" It's like we are taking this box and we're trying to
turn into some sort of God that we can touch, and it's going to
give us all the answers, but if we're going to do that, it has to
be a God that we are comfortable to live with, and it's one that we
can choose, and one that fits in with people's ethics and their
sense of purpose. So, I see data as part of fitting something that
can make us all better in so many different ways, whether that is
healing or bringing people together.
Jen Stirrup (00:06:29):
So I think if we could solve these problems where people are
feeling that they are not interconnected, then we could start to
try and look at that and perhaps think about making people feel
whole and feel more together. Because I think what COVID has done
is really helped us to focus a lot on data but perhaps not about
how we could do things better. It seems that we have an opportunity
to decide what goes back in to make the new normal or the next
normal. And I'm worried I suppose that I don't see that happening
as much as I would like. So yeah, data is important. Absolutely. We
wouldn't be here without it and the fact people are struggling with
it does pay my mortgage. I still would like us to ask ourselves the
bigger questions as well as something that's important to me.
Rob Collie (00:07:14):
Let me check here. Oh yeah yup, it pays my mortgage as well. We're
here for a reason that's for sure. I loved you talking about the
AI, this box, that we're going to sort of elevate to the status of
a God or that's how a lot of people are viewing it subconsciously.
Of course, it's a box that we built.
Jen Stirrup (00:07:33):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (00:07:33):
We fed it with our context. It got fed with our assumptions and
also our blind spots and now if it makes decisions, that thing
starts making judgments and decisions that impact people's lives.
It's a tricky proposition, it's one that's best approached very
carefully.
Jen Stirrup (00:07:55):
I agree and I think that's why the bigger questions are important.
So say for example, you may have seen the Netflix information
series. It was called 'The Social Hack' or something like that.
I've forgotten the name, but it was talking about the role of bias
in data. One of the researchers found that their facial recognition
algorithm didn't recognize a face. And the reason for that was that
she's black and for me, I just thought, that's such a preventable
issue and how much time do you spend looking at preventable issues?
And perhaps not very much. I still see the magpie problem a lot in
technology. Companies are happier buying a new technology that they
see that's going to solve all their problems, but actually it's not
doing that. It's maybe replacing as a bad answer to a different
question. We can't see that right now in artificial
intelligence.
Jen Stirrup (00:08:48):
There's some research going on, which will decrease the size of
data sets that AI needs in order to create its algorithms and that
sounds fine. It's a good piece of research, but what I'd like to
see is more researches on collating datasets which are less biased,
so that we can think about focusing and trying to make the
algorithms fewer rather than focusing on making them smaller.
Jen Stirrup (00:09:13):
I know a few years ago, you probably remember, everyone talked
about big data. Big data was the thing but we didn't ask ourselves
if this was the right data. It might be big, but if it's missing
out large sections of the population, then that's building an
inequality before we get started. I think, even if you don't have
the answers, asking these questions is a good thing. I don't have
all the answers. There's people working in this field much much
smarter than me and they all live and breathe this stuff and I read
it, the things that they're doing and talking about, and I think
this is such an important part of what we do every day. I think
it's really important. I don't know what you think, but there's so
much going on in the world of data at the moment that it feels hard
to keep up sometimes.
Thomas Larock (00:09:58):
So first I want you both to remember in case you've forgotten, but
you can purchase the Azure Data Box, that does exist.
Rob Collie (00:10:07):
We will just call it God in a box.
Thomas Larock (00:10:09):
Azure Data Box, it's actually for shipping storage to an Azure data
center, but that's what they chose to call it and I said: "You put
your data in the box or it gets the hose again." Right? So-
Rob Collie (00:10:20):
No no, Tom, it's one: "Put your data in the box."
Thomas Larock (00:10:26):
So, I mean, that does exist. The first point I wanted to make that
you danced around, like Rob you were talking about how we're
building this thing and it comes with all of our failings. And I
know Jen, she leads discussions on diversity, inclusion, equality
and I try to emphasize why that's so much more important and
especially seeing the rise and I saw the Netflix special as well,
and the Data Justice League. The idea is we need to have those
programs in order to have better models. We have to be aware of the
bias inherent in the stuff that has already been built. And I think
there's a lot more awareness over the last 18 months regarding the
products that are on the market that are already failing us because
they were built with these biases. And that's a difficult thing to
overcome now that you have police departments or governments
deploying this technology, thinking, as Jen said, it's this God
that is just going to give you all the answers.
Thomas Larock (00:11:35):
Jen, you also hinted on the thing about the question. So, you're
replacing one problem with another, and that made me think of how
vital it is that you understand the question you need answered and
a lot of times that gets kind of shifted, it's fluid almost. It's
like: "Oh, well we were doing this thing we think this next thing
we'll solve for it." But the next thing you're getting is actually
answering a completely different question than what you thought you
were doing and it leads to a huge, huge disconnect. And I think the
last thing I would say Jen, I've seen that research about the data
sets. I'm encouraged by the idea that we could get people to
understand that it's not the volume of data that makes a better
model. It's the data that was chosen to be collected in the manner
in which it's collected.
Thomas Larock (00:12:30):
So I know the research on building these models and they're saying:
"Yeah, you don't need a billion rows. The accuracy tails off at
some point after, say, a million rows." At some point more data
doesn't make this model any more accurate but the inherent problem
is how was it collected? What were the biases and how was it
collected? What was missing? Was it missing at random? Was it
missing not at random? The analysis necessary to conduct that
research, I think is where we are sorely lacking in business. I
know it exists in academia, but those people, they don't scale.
There's only so many of those, and there's a lot more businesses
trying to get the job done so I think that's fairly important.
Jen Stirrup (00:13:13):
There is a huge gap between academia and business. I guess there
always has been, I do speak to academic institutions from time to
time and it's clear that they are doing so much work. They really
are, but how that is getting out? I am not sure. Maybe that's why
they asked me to come and talk to them so I can talk to other
people about what they're doing and I don't mind doing that. I
think there needs to be more of that, because I think these
scientists, these academics are working in this, have to get access
to each other as well and the multidisciplinary aspect of it is
really interesting. I did a Postgraduate in Cognitive Science about
20 years ago, and suddenly it's back round again, and it's about
philosophy, linguistics, psychology, AI. And why did that go
away?
Jen Stirrup (00:14:03):
It should never have really gone away. I think we got as an
industry perhaps Goldstone and such technologies which these things
were re-badged as, and we got derailed by the marketing efforts.
But I think that there's real room for doing these things in a
better way. I don't know if you see this, but I see, or maybe it's
my age now, I've been around in the industry for a long time, but I
see that people are doing and making mistakes that I first saw 20
years ago, data collection, which you rarely mentioned, Tom, that's
been there for a long time and then it seemed to go away.
Jen Stirrup (00:14:36):
I think that's why academia does help because it gives us maybe
more of that consistent backgrounds than perhaps we get from
marketing noise, which was goes round in cycles and trends as
people are under pressure to purchase these licenses or whatever it
happens to be. I wish I had better answers for all of this, I think
sometimes it's about just asking these questions, blogging, talking
about them, putting them on social media so that when people are
thinking, "what do I do about data strategy?" That these things are
part of this. I saw a study recently saying that companies are
decreasingly likely to include ethics and these questions and
bigger societal questions as part of the data strategies as you're
trying to get the link. But it disheartens me because I thought I
could see that the voices are getting squeezed out.
Rob Collie (00:15:25):
Decreasingly likely, like we're trending-
Jen Stirrup (00:15:28):
Trending down.
Rob Collie (00:15:28):
You know, it'd be one thing to be flat, right? I mean that would
also be disheartening, but to be decreasing, decreasingly likely to
be factoring in ethics into a data strategy. Now we've been talking
a lot and I think it's a good thing to continue to talk about the
implications of AI and machine learning in this space, the business
intelligence industry isn't particularly fraught with this kind of
problem, right. Transactions happened, or they didn't, you know,
and it was the number of six or a seven. I mean like, you can get
it wrong, you can have bugs, right. But there isn't any like
objective debate about what, there shouldn't be any way about what
actually has happened. But the decider systems, are a completely
different game, like where should we route this patient? This is
going to have a huge impact on their life.
Rob Collie (00:16:21):
That's a very, very, very different game and we've been talking
about sort of like, the completeness of the data that is used to
train these systems, but I think it's really instructive just to
stop for a moment and go, you know what, even if we were able to
feed these systems a 100% comprehensive picture of today's world,
we still have to accept the fact that we're telling it that today's
world is what we want. Right. And maybe we don't, you know and
there's always a judgment in training these systems, we tell it
what is a success and what isn't a success. Our unintentional
biases can leak into this stuff in a million different places, even
if you suddenly had God-like comprehensive powers to feed it,
quote-on-quote, all the data, right. It's still leaky. It's still
fraught.
Jen Stirrup (00:17:13):
Yeah and actually, I think it's an extension of their problem that
we see just when we're building a data warehouse. Sometimes I'll go
into a customer and they'll say, "you know, we want to see our data
and see our latest vendor here," and then I'll say, "well, is it
preserving the data or is it just, you know, been reamed out the
other end, what you're doing with it? Where you're storing it?" And
then the argument against the data warehouse as well. It's not
going to capture everything in the possible universe of
possibilities in my business, so I don't want to do it. And I find
the argument goes something like, "there's an edge case that it
won't cover." Others, "this edge case, it won't cover here." And
then you have to say, "well, you know okay. So it's not going to
cover all the possible edge cases, but it will cover 80% of what
you need, and the rest, can go to shadow IT or shadow data systems
or wherever they happen to be."
Jen Stirrup (00:18:03):
And I think we're still trying as it's a bigger picture perhaps
trying to control everything that happens around our business, but
we have to be flexible enough to cater for these scenarios. We
haven't seen this before. I think that's what makes the AI so
difficult actually, as we have more than one type of AI, we have a
general artificial intelligence, which is more like Terminator, you
know, these kinds of things.
Rob Collie (00:18:29):
Innocuous stuff like that.
Thomas Larock (00:18:30):
Harmless. What's the worst that could happen.
Rob Collie (00:18:32):
Yeah. I mean.
Jen Stirrup (00:18:35):
Well, I think as humans, we do enough damage to ourselves, most of
the time we don't need a Skynet.
Thomas Larock (00:18:38):
That's true. I agree. That's often my reaction to, well you know,
like self-driving cars, like what if it makes this mistake? Okay
yeah but the human being track record behind the wheel, we're not
trying to be perfect, we're just trying to be better than people,
which is a little bit more achievable perhaps.
Jen Stirrup (00:18:56):
Exactly and it's all a bit context, which is how to program. You
probably remember a few years ago, at SQLBits say Tom, Steve
Wozniak visited. I don't know if you were there for that SQLBits
but Steve Wozniak is one of the team that founded apple. You must
know who he is, but he's talked to us about the Wozniak test for
AI, the testers will have an artificial intelligence sought of
robot come into your house and make you a coffee from scratch. Now
that involves a lot of contextual knowledge. They have to find your
kitchen, they have to get your ingredients and get a cup, you know
all that kind of thing and that requires context. And that's more
general AI, that's more difficult to program. But if we're to think
with CEI being more successful for businesses automation
productivity, and it's just trying to do something, one thing
really, really well, something that will help a human to make
better decisions faster.
Jen Stirrup (00:19:51):
Such as perhaps parceling out x-rays, which don't show any presence
of a tumor as an example, but we then get the 10% of x-rays that
makes sure something and passing those onto a human to look at. So
there's plenty of rooms for defining what success looks like for us
for artificial intelligence I think. With business intelligence,
your right, we should have one version of the truth. People are
still living so much in Excel and Google sheets and things of
empires away, and that are sitting in their laptop. How do you move
that to the cloud? So you move them perhaps to office 365 or a
Google work space, and then you're trying to encourage people to
rethink the processes about, Hey why do we save stuff in the cloud?
Or why do we make our decision making more apparent? And it seems a
bit difficult to ask AI to make its decision-making more apparent,
when actually a lot of people spend time hiding or umpiring the
knowledge anyway.
Jen Stirrup (00:20:49):
I don't know if you think this, but I often think business
intelligence problems are change management problems in disguise.
It just happens to be showing up in the data that there's a
problem.
Thomas Larock (00:20:59):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (00:20:59):
Ultimately it's not about knowing, it's about improving. Knowing
that there's a problem and even knowing what's causing it is really
just the beginning. Very often it's like okay, now what? This is
going to be a really difficult problem to address
operationally.
Jen Stirrup (00:21:16):
I think we forget the process of optimization and business
intelligence. And I wonder if that's the reason why AI is becoming
so prevalent at the moment, because it is much more clearly talking
about optimizing and improving processes and automating. I think in
business intelligence, we have almost stopped talking about
optimizing business processes. I don't see it quite as much, I
wonder if we get sort of caught up in data visualization, you know
Tableau came along and then power BI and everyone started chasing
after that. We're perhaps forgetting that actually we're doing all
that for a purpose, which is to make something better somewhere. I
don't know if you find this but, I obviously run [inaudible
00:21:54] business and it's very hard to get customers to agree to
a case study because they don't want to show that actually they
were in a bad place and they don't want to show the competitors
that they were in a bad place. Everyone's ashamed of the data. So
it's really tough.
Rob Collie (00:22:07):
I've seen sort of multiple facets of that. So first of all, yes,
everyone thinks that they are uniquely broken, everyone's
organization that they feel a level of sort of like discomfort and
shame about where they're at today or where they were yesterday.
They feel like they're the only ones, but we see so many
organizations per year, especially the kinds of projects and the
pace at which we move the world is very much uniformly broken. No
one's really behind, everyone's way behind of where you'd sort of
like as a dispassionate observer, you'd expect people to be a lot
further ahead than they are, but no, no, really the basics are
still not sorted out universally. We're still kind of in a dark
age, in a way.
Jen Stirrup (00:22:51):
Yeah. Something, I see really basic issues of one customer example
of talking about where they were calculating the mean incorrectly
for two years. And then two years before that, for another two
years, they were calculating the median incorrectly in Excel. What
they were doing was it were taking the middle value of a column. So
of course, if you sorted the column next to it, the value changed.
And they said that that was the median. And I said, "okay, so
you've got a column of 20 items. Are you telling me that whatever's
a number 10 is the mean?" And they said, "well, yes, that's in
column B." What happens if you change the order in column E from
perhaps alphabetical order to reverse alphabet order, the values
can be changed, right? And they looked at me and I said, "why did
you calculate it like that?"
Jen Stirrup (00:23:41):
And they said, cause we can calculate the mean using Excel formula.
So eventually I said, "why are you using the mean," because it's
quite sensitive to outliers the median's better. and then they
said, "well we've tried that but we couldn't calculate the median
either." I said, so okay "for four years you've been trying to
calculate the mean and the median incorrectly in this one
spreadsheet. Can you tell me about the rest of your spreadsheets?
How often are you trying to use the median or the mean all of it
incorrectly?" And I think it's probably the only time in my 20 plus
year career, I've seen a customer actually punch himself in the
face and it was just absolutely stunning. And he said, "I'll go and
speak to the statisticians." And I thought, you've got
statisticians working here. I'd love to meet them.
Jen Stirrup (00:24:26):
I wonder what they're telling you. And that was my second deal in
sight, I was on the on and off for six months. And that was just
the first problem I found. So I know we talked about data literacy.
I'm not a fan of that phrase. I prefer fluency or something along
those lines. So I don't want to assume people are data illiterate.
Because I don't think that they are, I think we're born naturally
within us an innate sense of numbers in a way, we can tell more
from less, right? My dog can do it, right. So if I got five treats
in my hand, he knows I've got others. If I just give them one, he's
not stupid, he has a sense of quantity. And I think it's about, we
need to get better in industry, perhaps explaining results,
findings, conclusions, and context to people instead of just
throwing dashboards at people and expecting them to understand
it.
Jen Stirrup (00:25:16):
If somebody recently sent me a scientific article which was all
about COVID and some testing that they did in mice, and I could
read it, but I couldn't understand it because I don't have a
background in medicine. I read the abstracts and I read the last
paragraph and the first paragraph, but I didn't read the rest of it
because I thought this is way beyond me. I don't understand what
they're trying to say. But I think for me that highlighted a
problem with data literacy, I could read it, I couldn't understand
it, and I certainly couldn't act on it. And I don't want to give
other people who are trying to consume business intelligence
products in some way, whether they're dashboards or even dumps from
Excel, that they just don't understand what they're getting. How we
do that, I think is perhaps focusing in data translation.
Jen Stirrup (00:26:03):
How we do that, I think, is perhaps focusing in data translation. I
had a woman who worked for me, she actually was a qualified
librarian. So, her insights about information retrieval were very
interesting. I learned a lot from her, because that was a little
bit the data. And she would say things like, "Jennifer, Google is
not the only search facility in the world. We can use so much
more," because she's accessed all their library systems around the
world. And there's so much information we don't access because we
can't, usually. But the point being that what I learned from her
was about translating things, where they were easier to understand
for other people. And I think it's an incredibly valuable lesson,
and the world needs more librarians.
Rob Collie (00:26:43):
There's a lot here, right? Business intelligence was always a means
to an end, but because it was so difficult, it was just so
incredibly difficult to even get a halfway-competent system
instilled, built, configured. When something is that hard for that
long, it becomes its own goal after a while. It's easy to habituate
to the idea that this is the goal, intelligence is the goal,
knowledge is the goal. No, no, no. Improvement was always the goal.
What's really been fascinating for us is, when we see our clients,
the people we work with, when we see them start to get the BI
problem under control for the first time ever, their gaze
immediately sort of zooms back and they start thinking completely
unbidden by us. We don't have to seed this conversation. It just
happens. They start looking at the bigger picture now and going,
"Oh, okay. So, now this information needs to feed into better
decision loops and optimization and things like that. And how do we
facilitate that?"
Rob Collie (00:27:53):
And from the beginning, we try to counsel everything being built
around that "taking action" thing. You can build an incredibly
informative dashboard that is intelligent, it's a work of art in
many ways, on many levels, and it can be useless. It can be
factual, it can be impressive, and it can be useless because you
can't use it to make any improved decisions. I've been guilty of
this. I have built things like this, like, "Ta-da." And the client
doesn't even have the language to push back.
Jen Stirrup (00:28:30):
It's something I've tried to keep in mind now is the utility of
what I'm actually doing, because people just want data for the sake
of data, and they get that. I think, sometimes, they don't know
what to ask for, so they take something because it's better than
nothing. And they'll say things like, "Right, I want the last five
years of data and 191 columns, I want it all on the same page, and
I want to be able to print it." And then you have to say, "Well,
let's think about how feasible that is. You'll get five years of
data, it's not going to fit in one page. 191 columns is going to be
really small. So, let's have a..." People ask that because they
don't know what they want.
Jen Stirrup (00:29:06):
About a dashboard recently, a health and safety dashboard, it was
using power apps as well. So, the company, if they saw a health and
safety priority issue, they could use the app, if they were health
and safety professionals, and the app would record data, you could
upload a photograph, and then that would go into a system which you
could then see in Power BI. And the nice thing about that was you
could see improvements over time because people could get their
health and safety issues resolved more quickly, so things like
boxes stacked against fire exits, slip and trip hazards.
Jen Stirrup (00:29:43):
Now, it may not seem very interesting, but actually, the reason
that project had happened was because someone that had been in a
health and safety incident and it had not been tracked properly,
and the idea being that they were trying to improve the process.
But sometimes, I think data problems and data solutions happen
because of two things. One is you need an executive sponsor, and
the second thing is a crisis. And together, the executive sponsor
and the crisis will engender change somewhere. And that change
management process so often turns into a business intelligence
solution. And nothing is an industry. It's something I'm personally
trying to always keep in mind is: what's the purpose? What's the
optimization? What problem am I trying to solve?
Rob Collie (00:30:30):
Yeah, one time, I was asked by a client to help debug a report that
was really slow. So, this is great because this is an example of a
report that I didn't build, right? I can use an example that wasn't
one of my own families, but I'll tell my own as well if you want.
But I go, "Okay, I'll take a look at it." I'm expecting some sort
of DAX or data modeling problem or something like that. And they
show me the report, and it is a 100,000-row pivot table. The pivot
table has a 100,000 rows in it. There's DAX behind it. It's a DAX
data model behind the scenes, but the report itself, the output is
100,000 rows. And before I even engage, I just turn and look at
them and say, "Oh, my God, who was using this? You don't have a
performance problem. It's..." And they're very insistent. "No, no,
no, no, no. This is the thing. We need this." I'm like, "All
right."
Rob Collie (00:31:21):
So, I start looking at it, and it's crazy how many columns there
are. And it was a list of every employee and every location that
they have in the country, which was hundreds of locations and
thousands of employees. And for each employee, their scheduled
time-in and their scheduled time-out, and their actual time clocked
in and actual time clocked out. I turned back at him again and I
go, "Okay, really? What are we doing here?" And they're like,
"Okay. So, we have all these regional managers that are looking at
this multiple times a day, probably eight times a day or more, to
try to figure out if any of their stores are empty, aren't staffed
because people didn't show up." And I just smacked my forehead and
I go, "You don't need the timecard report," which is what they
called this thing, the timecard report, "You need the empty store
detector."
Rob Collie (00:32:18):
And I mean, there was no way to make this thing faster. I mean,
this thing was such a gross misuse of technology. I just went to
the whiteboard and I sketched what the empty store detector could
look like, and they're like, "Oh, that's great. We'll never get our
managers to switch over to using it, so let's just go back to
fixing this other piece of junk."
Jen Stirrup (00:32:37):
Yeah, because something that I struggle with, personally, is the
idea of surveyance reports. It's something that really bothers me.
I've pushed back on a few customers to see, "Are you micromanaging
or are you surveying? What is it you're trying to do?" On
occasions, I have escalated it to say, "Look, this report is
probably been used to hit people for the head, and I'm not
comfortable with this because I think this has gone beyond
micromanaging." And we had set the scope of the project of the
thing we were supposed to deliver. So, I'm going to escalate this
because I want to understand better the purpose. And if I'm wrong,
we will deliver it."
Jen Stirrup (00:33:12):
And normally, when I go back and see that, even in that particular
instance, I showed the senior management and I said, "Your middle
management want to do this." And they said, "No. We are not
spending time doing that. We need to understand the wider context.
If there is any issues going on with staffing, then this is
probably a symptom rather than the cause of the issues, if people
are being watched like that." So, I think some teams escalating, as
much as I don't like to do it, sometimes is the best way
forward.
Rob Collie (00:33:44):
It takes a lot of professional courage to do something like that.
For example, have you ever taken one of those principled stands and
ended up no longer working for that client because they basically
fire you for not staying in your lane? That's a risk, right?
Jen Stirrup (00:34:01):
Yeah. It is. I've never been fired for that, but I have said,
"Uncomfortable, and I'm we going to stop delivering services, and
we need to decide on an exit strategy." There's different ways you
can do that, right? So, you deal with the current project. You then
say that you're busy for the next century when we come back to you
for other work. I don't like doing that because I often feel like
you should give them an alternative to say, "Well, here. I can't
deliver it, but I know someone who can." And then I recommend one
to my network. But the thing is, when I make these quite principal
stands, people back down often, or they back down and they just
asked me to do it. But when I've gone back to people like that
customer, who come back to me for extra work, I've done some
investigating work and I've found that they have not implemented a
thing that I've been worried about or concerned about.
Jen Stirrup (00:34:49):
So, I think, sometimes, if you do speak up, people are maybe
surprised by it. It's maybe different who it comes from. And I
think, perhaps, even a soft Scottish accent, smiling sweetly at
them and saying, "Can you explain to me a bit more about the
reasoning behind this? Because your team want to do this thing, but
I have some discomfort because it's outside scope." And they're not
telling them, and they're very direct. Wait at first, but they
start to get their message.
Jen Stirrup (00:35:16):
A former boss of mine years ago, he said I had a soft rein
approach. I actually think that's a nice way of putting it, where,
as much as I might be tempted to go in all guns blazing, I'm trying
to gently bring it up and then bring it up again a bit more firmly,
and then, suddenly, people are starting to understand better. But
that's me having to probably, sometimes, exert a huge amount of
self-control as well. But I think that's part of the consulting
game. It's very tough. But I think seeing something like that
happen, I think the reason it happens is because people aren't
thinking about it longer-term. And me as a consultant, it's easier,
perhaps, for me to think about it long-term and also a bit more
closely as well, because you are thinking about the consequences of
what you're trying to do, the purpose.
Rob Collie (00:36:04):
Yeah. If you're good at data and you're experience with it, you
spend a lot of time with it, that allows you to put some of those
things a little further down in the subconscious, and the rest of
your human faculties can resume working, whereas, I think, for
people who data is still this arcane thing, it's not the thing that
they've spent their lives with, it's just really easy to get
target-fixated on the data, data, data, data, right? "It's not
about the people, we're trying to figure out the data," right? "And
inform me," and all of that.
Rob Collie (00:36:33):
And I think it's like when you're first learning to drive, I
couldn't have the radio on. The radio was really distracting. And
you certainly couldn't have a conversation with someone next to
you. So, all you can do just to make sure that you're turning the
wheel the right amount and all this kind of stuff. It's just
overwhelming. But once you internalize all that stuff and you build
the muscle memory and all those sorts of things, now your brain is
free to do some other things. Like this data fluency thing we were
talking about, it's neat how, as you climb that slope, you're never
there, it's a perpetual journey, the other parts of the equation
like the human things, right? They can come back.
Rob Collie (00:37:12):
An example, even just from our own business, we do a lot of
internet advertising. And sometimes, when people at our company are
thinking about this, now the wrong way to do it is to go and like,
"Oh, let's go look at the ad words API and let's get fascinated by
the tech around this." And I'm always trying to remind people that,
no, no, no, we're trying to scale a human interaction. That's what
we're trying to do. We're trying to reach people with our
humanity-
Jen Stirrup (00:37:43):
I think that's so true.
Rob Collie (00:37:43):
... and we're using a technological system to do that. It's a tool
for the other thing.
Jen Stirrup (00:37:50):
You're so right. I think we should be using technology empower and
enable. And I think my personal mission is about helping people. I
find that rewarding, personally. I like things with a purpose, so
that's why I do charity work with organizations like DataKind,
because when you get someone crying because you've solved a problem
for them and you've helped them, you know how incredibly grateful
they are. But I think, for me, that's why diversity and inclusion,
equality, and intersectionality more recently has become really
important to me.
Jen Stirrup (00:38:21):
I'll just give you a few examples that's in my head. I did a
project recently, and there was a woman of color in my team, and I
felt that she was being talked over. I'm used to being talk over,
softly spoken. But I could see it with her. And I just made a
conscious effort to say, "I'm sorry, but I don't think she's had
the opportunity to speak, and I can see she's tried to have some
input." So, some of it's a bit like that. But some of it is
directly saying, "What do you think? Sorry, we haven't heard from
you," and pulling people out. And you know what? She was and is
still incredibly insightful. And sometimes, the best data
scientists I work with are people who can't code. And I think about
her and I think about another woman of color as well that I work
beside.
Jen Stirrup (00:39:06):
Fantastic data scientists, they both know Excel, but they can't
write a line of code. And the reason they're so good is because
they are such fantastic questions. That means the rest of us who
can code have to then go and get the answers. And I think the knack
of asking the right questions is such a gift, it's such a skill,
and it's something that I am consciously trying to improve myself
on. And I think diversity, inclusion, and equality is really
important, but we wouldn't get anywhere with any of that if we're
not allowing people space either to talk or we're not able to give
them the space to ask the right questions.
Jen Stirrup (00:39:42):
Now, I am constantly learning every day. And to do that, I'm having
to learn to get better at asking questions. And it is a skill to
ask, but I think, when we're dealing with data, it's about helping
people not to feel stupid if they're asking questions, because I
think, with these particular cases, it's very easy to feel
diminished in a conversation where other people are understand the
technology, they can code, you can't, but you've got an insight. I
know we talk about data-driven, but I like the term
"insights-inspired," and I wish we had more of that because that, I
think, gives us room for other people who perhaps don't understand
the technology but do have business insights that I would never
get, because they help me interpret the code or the data to make it
better.
Thomas Larock (00:40:28):
So, you said data-driven, but you prefer insights-inspired. I think
those are still two different things because, when I think of
data-driven, I actually think of that in terms of, "I'm going to
make a decision based upon what the data's telling me, not upon my
feelings." The insights-inspired, to me, is how I get to the
question I want answered, right? But I'm still data-driven. I think
there's some overlap, but I also think there's a lot of space there
where they are distinct, because I do believe in data-driven
because I've been in those meetings where somebody's like, "Yeah, I
don't really care. We're going to do what I think is right." "But
the data says something completely opposite." "Yeah. That doesn't
matter to me." And lots of those cultures exist. I love
insights-inspired, and I'm going to steal that.
Jen Stirrup (00:41:16):
That's fine. I think we need both, actually. I'm sorry if I wasn't
clear. But you're right, there is a good impetus for people to
think, "What does the data say?" And I like that. I think the
"insights-inspired" piece will help us to understand if the data's
right. And I'll give you an example of something that I did. So, I
was doing some work for the national health service and there's
some data missing for a hospital, and it was not an insignificant
amount of data. It was for about five years, the data. And I
searched for it all morning, and I was just about to ,arch down the
corridor to go and corral a DBA to ask him, Have we lost any data?
Because I cannot find this."
Jen Stirrup (00:41:55):
And then, when [inaudible 00:41:56] was passing, she said, "How are
you doing?" I said, "Oh, have you ever worked at this hospital?" I
won't mention which one it is. And she said, "Oh, I was there until
it closed for five years and it merged with another hospital." And
I thought, "Oh, you've just answered my question. Right." Because I
was sweating beads because I thought, "We've lost five years' worth
of data." And I thought, "We've done that. We are in so much
trouble," because it's a lot of data. It's a lot of patient data.
No, no, no, no. They went somewhere else. And there was a very good
explanation that I would never have got by the data. I could have
hugged her.
Jen Stirrup (00:42:31):
And to this day, I still feel the palpable relief, because I was
walking in the hospital, thinking we need a really good explanation
for this. But according to the data, it was not there. So, I think,
when I look at data-driven, I think they're two sides of the same
coin, because insights will tell you what the nurse said, "Well,
actually, it's like this," and they will add to the
interpretation.
Jen Stirrup (00:42:54):
I just sat in a meeting once where one of the leaders said, "All
right. So, we've got the data now?" I said, "Yes, everything's
fine." And in front of four of his team members, he said, "So, we
can get rid of the business analysts then, because we've got the
data now." And even when I mention this, I still, at this point,
feel my blood pressure rising, which is not good for me. I am well
over the age of 40. And actually, I was stunned. I said, "How are
you going to understand the data if you don't have your business
analysts. Who's going to tell you what it means? "Oh." I said, "Are
you really thinking that you can just throw your data at a wall,
see what sticks, see what's left, and that's going to drive a
business? Because, pretty much, that's what you're doing, if you
are not involving the people who understand the business."
Jen Stirrup (00:43:43):
And after the meeting, I mean, some of them were crying, saying,
"He was talking about me losing my job." And the people impact was
terrible. So, this is where I've got my principals coming in. So, I
went and I escalated that afternoon, and he was taken off the
project the next day. That was due to happen. That was just
outrageous. And if any of you who are listening and this is you, I
love that team, their insights were incredible and I learned so
much from them. And to the leader in that organization, please
listen to your team members. You will get so many many great
insights.
Rob Collie (00:44:23):
Wow.
Jen Stirrup (00:44:24):
Sorry, this is very cathartic for me. I'm glad you've brought me on
today.
Rob Collie (00:44:33):
I mean, just watching your face as you told that story, I can see
the emotions that you're feeling, right?
Jen Stirrup (00:44:37):
He's going to get this.
Rob Collie (00:44:38):
And it's a mix, right? It's a mix of the beauty of some of these
people that you worked with, right? Contrasting with like this
horrible, horrible attitude, at the same time, from this one
individual. When you have all those feelings at the same time, it's
like you need a new name for it. It's like, "What is this
feeling?"
Jen Stirrup (00:44:56):
And I think the industry is like a pendulum, so we go towards
data-driven. And for some organizations, they need good
data-driven, so Tom's given a great example. But sometimes, it goes
too far and they say, "Yeah, I read that buzzword. I'm going to do
that." And then, there's an expense, something has to give. And
that, unfortunately, was his team. Like you said earlier, Rob, it's
about the people. We should be there to help people by helping
people do their jobs better, not necessarily replacing them. That
was not ever on the menu.
Rob Collie (00:45:29):
Yeah. It's counterintuitive. Sometimes, when your data system gets
better, the right move is to have more analysts because there's
more ROI in having them. Even just hiring a data professional
services firm such as yourself, the reason to do it is because the
ROI can be massive.
Jen Stirrup (00:45:51):
Yes. There's lots of unseen costs. I worked with an accountant last
year who spent four out of five days a week merging Excel together.
And I sat with her, I got to know her pretty well, I mean, remotely
because of COVID. And eventually, she said, "Oh, I'm looking for a
new job." And I said, "Oh, really?" And she said, "I did not incur
a graduate debt to sit and do something that I could have done
without my degree." She'd put a lot of effort and, same in the US,
lots of student loans to do a degree. And she said, "Technically,
my job title is accountant, but I'm not accounting. I am munging
data around in Excel." And one of the projects I had recommended
was data integration, right? And they wouldn't go forward it. They
kept saying, "No, no, no. We've always done it this way. So-and-so
om accounts does all that." But they never asked her what she
wanted.
Jen Stirrup (00:46:43):
So, she left, and I was not a bit surprised because she said, "I
want to be an accountant. I want to account." And I know that it's
not my personal lifestyle. It wouldn't be my choice of a job, but
for her, she just loved that, and she wasn't getting to do. So,
sometimes, the causes are quite unseen if you're not looking after
the processes or the data, because that incurs hiring costs, then,
on staff onboarding costs that don't get included often as part of
these business strategy projects. When I'm doing a data strategy, I
try to include them, to say, "But what happens if you change? But
what happens if you don't?" And you're going to lose people because
your people, very often, want to be skilled in the later
technology.
Jen Stirrup (00:47:25):
And I'll give you an example. One customer I worked with said to
me, "We need your help with reporting services, SQL server." So,
"Okay, good. I like reporting services." Then, they talked to me
and I said, "What version are you using?" And they said, "2005."
And I said, "Why?" "Because the application that's using it
requires SQL server 2005 and we can't upgrade." Said, "So, what was
the application written in?" "VB6," which you may have heard of
that technology. It was around in 1999. It was last century. So,
the data state was antique. I had no idea that it was that bad. But
then, the application came up, and Microsoft still do a version of
a Visual Basic. You can go to the site, the latest version... But
the point being that the staff and that place had settled for VB6,
they'd settled for 2005. That doesn't mean that you're getting the
best team members. And when we worked, it was recommended an
architecture. Said it was not touching it with our [inaudible
00:48:30].
Rob Collie (00:48:30):
I'm still very fluent in VBA6, so maybe after we finished this
show, can you give me the information of this organization? I might
go apply. The last place on earth that VBA6 fluency is... Actually,
that's not true. It's still being used everywhere. It's just not
being used centrally.
Jen Stirrup (00:48:53):
Yes. I did say to them, "I am not touching any software that was
not built in this century. So, if it's in the last century, you've
no chance." So, re-architected, actually, we're using the Azure
Cosmos...
Thomas Larock (00:49:04):
It's a good rule.
Jen Stirrup (00:49:05):
... and dot... Yeah, it's a good rule. It's a rule to live by, you
can quote me on that. I use no software built in the last century.
In fact, I'm going to make that my new company advertising
strapline. That's great. I like that. So, they're happily in Cosmos
and .NET. And we used that because the developer said, "Hey, does
that mean we get to modernize?" I said, "Yes. And you will either
modernize or I will leave. Your bosses are going to have to
modernize." So, they did. But again, that soft Scottish accent
comes up. "Well, why don't we use software that's built in this
century?"
Rob Collie (00:49:42):
It's a devastating maneuver. If we were making a card for you in a
trading card game, that would be one of your two power moves,
right? Soft Scottish accent. And the description of the power is
something like, "Removes all defensive screen cards from
opponent."
Thomas Larock (00:50:07):
Disarming.
Jen Stirrup (00:50:10):
Absolutely. Yeah. It's just funny how the data problems are really
throwing up what's wrong with the organization. Obviously, they did
that, but two years ago, I went to visit them again, just before
COVID last year. They'd implemented a data science team and they
just wanted some strategic consulting. And I was really pleased
with how they turned around. So, sometimes, if you just find a
problem like that, a small success, building those small successes,
and they were allowed to up. I don't know if you see this, but big
thing of what I'm doing when I'm in organizations is change
management, but also a lot of that's people. And people tend to
align themselves with success. So, if you can just show one small
success, people get on board with it.
Rob Collie (00:50:53):
Yeah. I mean, it's everywhere in humanity, right? We're
fundamentally pattern-matchers. And if you haven't given a
population any positive patterns to match, no examples, it's
amazing how stuck you can be. But one success, right? We have an
infinite percentage increase in our population of successful
examples. We went from zero to one. Like you say, the dog knows
that there's five treats in your hand, right? We're not dumb. If
there can be one success, there can be more. But if there's zero
successes, that's powerful.
Jen Stirrup (00:51:25):
Yeah. And I don't know if you see this problem, but it's something
I see a lot is people think maybe Tableau or Power BI, they buy
this, it's going to give them a success. And it does, until the
data starts to get hard. And then they either have to scale up in
DAX, which is fine, but sometimes they don't have room or bandwidth
to do that, so they get almost a bit depleted because they realize,
actually, data's hard. We've never really nailed data as the human
race.
Rob Collie (00:51:55):
It's always hard. Unfortunately, to sell software, to a certain
extent, you have to sell the lie. If you're a software vendor, you
have to se...
Rob Collie (00:52:03):
... have to sell the lie. If you're a software vendor, you have to
sell the lie that this tool is the magic fix, that it's going to
make data easy. And I do actually, in a weird way, I kind of like
blame Tableau for making this worse, but while at the same time,
being very grateful to Tableau that they made interactivity a must
have.
Jen Stirrup (00:52:24):
Yes.
Rob Collie (00:52:24):
I think they were actually, more than any one entity, responsible
for us breaking this notion that reporting services and similar
tools were it.
Jen Stirrup (00:52:34):
Yes. I remember the first time I saw Tableau. I had been hired as a
developer for SQL server [inaudible 00:52:40] services and my boss
said, "I think this is a future, this stuff, Tableau. Here's the
download link. Tell me what you think". 10 minutes I was completely
hooked and it changed my career because otherwise I would have
probably stayed in the database reporting world and I suddenly
thought there's a whole world here with stuff. So I love what they
did. I really, really think it was groundbreaking.
Thomas Larock (00:53:01):
At what point did a report just become synonymous with the word
"Tableau"? I have a limited experience and maybe it's an outlier,
but to me, I always hear people say, "I'm going to run a Tableau
report". I mean, it's just a report. I worked with Crystal and
BusinessObjects, same thing I guess. And do people always qualify
the type of report they're running as if that makes it more special
or do people always say, "I'm going to run a power BI report"? Why
is it always a qualifier? And in my case, I always hear, "I'm going
to go run the Tableau report". I'm like, "It's just a report. It
doesn't really matter what's the software that's doing it. It's
just data. It's just a report". But I hear that a lot. I just
figured I'd ask you two if that's the same experience?
Jen Stirrup (00:53:43):
Yeah. I think I'm hearing that more and more and I actually think
it's almost going the other way, where people are only wanting
interactivity, they're only wanting things they can click and tick.
And what they're not wanting as much is a SQL server, mahogany red,
forest green, slate gray, corporate template, because that was the
what, about four templates you got with reporting services. So I
see that more and more apart from the finance world. They still
very much want it. But what I'd still see is a big need for tables.
People still want to export to Excel. And I think it was you, Rob,
who actually said this years ago, that the third most common button
in Tableau is something like "export to CSV".
Thomas Larock (00:54:26):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (00:54:28):
Yeah. The third most common button in any data application is
"export to Excel".
Thomas Larock (00:54:32):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (00:54:32):
Behind "OK" and "Cancel". That's the joke. And what it is, is an
acknowledgement of, again, the human plane that this report, this
app, does not meet your needs. It's in a way like if you could
instrument your organization and find all of the "export to Excel"
buttons that are being worn out, those are like the hotspots for
you to go and improve things. That button being, click, click,
click, click, click, click, click all day long, is telling you that
there's a tremendous opportunity for improvement here, both in
terms of time saved, but also quality of result. Quality of
question that's even formulated. You mentioned questions earlier,
asking good questions. Here's the problem. The ability to execute
on answers and the inability to execute on answers, the friction,
the inertia, that works its way upstream into the question- forming
muscles. The question-forming muscles atrophy to a level where they
fit the ability to execute on the questions. And so when you
suddenly expand the ability to answer questions, it actually...
You've got to go back and re-expand your question-asking muscles to
be more aggressive, to be more ambitious.
Jen Stirrup (00:55:52):
Yes. I think sometimes the data-driven piece is trying to, in a
way, subtly bring that back into play. It's okay to admit that we
don't have all the answers and it's okay to admit that we need to
ask questions. I think there should be more of that. Something
that, certainly earlier in my career, asking questions was
discouraged. It meant you didn't know it. It meant that you were
vulnerable in some way. And I think as an industry, we need to
encourage people to ask questions. I think with the diversity
inclusion piece, try and make a conscious effort. If I think
someone in the meeting is being quiet, regardless of the
background, but at least I'm trying to watch out for that now,
whereas maybe 20 years ago, I wouldn't have realized it, but
sometimes people do sometimes need that extra help to speak up and
speak out. They often don't know what to say or how to beckon to a
meeting and say something. It's quite difficult.
Jen Stirrup (00:56:51):
Especially if you were being measured in your performance. I think
sometimes people see things very confidently. And actually when you
start to pick it apart, you think, "I need to as a person, stop
believe in confidence and maybe thinking is that right, not how
it's being delivered". I think they're stolen for quiet voices,
hopefully like mine, who are trying to say things but I do find
that harder to get heard. I think it's good that you do podcasts
like this because I think it gives people the opportunity to talk
about different ideas and how they impact people because that is
important. There's loads of vendor podcasts that will talk all
about the technology but we need to know better how to apply
it.
Rob Collie (00:57:31):
When we were talking about starting this show, it was pretty clear
we did not need another tech show. People who are working in tech,
but are human beings, like yourself, and who are focused on helping
other human beings. We weren't sure if it was going to work. It was
one of those like, "Are people are going to listen?".
Thomas Larock (00:57:45):
We're still not sure.
Rob Collie (00:57:50):
We knew that we were going to like it, but yeah, it's building an
audience. I've enjoyed it. And plus, it's an excuse to get together
and talk with people such as yourself. If we just pinged you out of
the blue and said, "Hey, you want to get on a two hour Zoom call
with us and just catch up?". That's going to get pushed and pushed
and pushed and pushed, but, "Oh a podcast? Oh, well, yeah. That's
exciting".
Jen Stirrup (00:58:14):
Yeah. I know what you mean. It's good to, I think, to try and
translate data and technology into something people feel is within
their reach because I think there is still an element of people who
are almost being scared of working with data. I deal a lot with
CTO's, CIO. I was busy CTO and some way reports sent to their CFO
because their CFO is over all of it, keeping costs down. The CTO
has to work really hard to justify them. And I think what they
want, ultimately, is not to appear stupid or not to know what
they're doing. So some of these leadership conversations I have are
about people saying, "Explain these terms to me. I don't know what
a data lakehouse is. Do I need one? How's it different from a data
lake? What about the warehouse? Is that going away or is that
rebranded as well?". I know Microsoft talked about data hubs
recently. If you're a data vault person, a data hub means something
quite specific. It's been a term around for 30 years to mean
something else. But I think sometimes people get very confused with
the terms.
Rob Collie (00:59:16):
Like for example, the noun "dashboard" in Power BI, right? It's
just a head clutching frustrating mistake. I mean a Power BI report
is probably best described as a dashboard. The multi-visual,
interactive experience, lowercase D dashboard is what I always want
to describe it as, but no, no, no, no. We repurposed that word.
Jen Stirrup (00:59:41):
I know, and customers don't always understand it because they say,
"Well, actually my report looks exactly like the dashboard. So I
don't understand this publishing thing". So I have to try and
explain that actually, we can take data from [inaudible 00:59:55]
here and you can extra things. I'm interested to know actually, how
much Power BI users spend actually making dashboards as opposed to
making reports. And I just wish we'd ever the answer to that
because sometimes you just want to get reports that they can run in
their desktop or not always sometimes use a browser and just have
the reports and have them open on the actual dashboards higher up.
So I feel that's a bit of a separation that maybe wasn't required
to have. But Tableau does something similar, doesn't it in a way?
But I think with Tableau, it's a bit more clear that you're putting
these things together.
Rob Collie (01:00:29):
Well, we were talking at the beginning about the importance of
comprehensive training sets. Well, let me just tell you, we only
need one data point here. I, as a Power BI user, have never once
created an actual Power BI dashboard. So let's just conclude that
that's it. No one uses them. But yeah, I've never felt compelled to
need one. I tend to put together, what I need in the report.
Jen Stirrup (01:00:56):
Yes. And that's what I do because I'm trying to get the customer
from A to B. I'm trying to do it quickly and I can see that they've
reached on that tool ceiling of where they want to go and then
they've got this other thing they need to do and they don't
understand why. So sometimes it's a battle I just don't have
because I just think, "You know what? These often been through so
much to get to that point in the first place, cleaning data and
getting access to the data and all the things that are hard and
even understanding what they want in the first place". I try and
work out where the fatigue is.
Rob Collie (01:01:28):
Yeah. I think there's a certain hubris just in the idea that a user
will go around and then harvest little chunks out of other reports
and take them completely out of context. Anyway, we didn't come
here for cynicism today but-
Jen Stirrup (01:01:43):
I have plenty of that.
Rob Collie (01:01:43):
But it's still there. We can't really help it. So it's come up a
few times and I want to make sure we actually make some time to
talk about it specifically. So you've mentioned a number of times,
inclusion and diversity and already a few anecdotes within your own
professional organization, within your own firm. Outside of your
own data relish organization, what are you up to in this space
around the diversity and inclusion as a cause? You're very active
in the community in this regard. Can you summarize for us what all
you're up to?
Jen Stirrup (01:02:15):
Yeah. I've started there to talk more about intersectionality.
There's a lot of data, which I don't have to hand, which is
terrible, that shows that it's the intersection of people's lived
experiences that can sometimes work together against that person.
So for example, we know that women are paid less than men, and
regardless of the stats that we use, that's the number that comes
up. There is some data that talks about how for black women, it's
even less and for Latin women, it's even less again. So the idea
being that, for people of certain ethnicities and backgrounds, it's
interacting with the fact that their background, their ethnicity,
their race is interacting with the fact that they're female, and
both of these characteristics together are interacting to produce
an adverse outcome for the individual.
Jen Stirrup (01:03:06):
Now this is quite an interesting area, is something that's been
part of academic research for about 30 years. And there's some
great researchers out there that talk about this. I want to say
[Christy Reynolds 01:03:18], but I need to double check that
surname because I'm not very good with names. It's age. Which is
another characteristic as well. I was called an interfering old bag
by somebody.
Rob Collie (01:03:29):
What?
Jen Stirrup (01:03:30):
I thought was really funny. There was a community person. I don't
know if they realized it would get back to me. And I said, "Okay,
so diversity and inclusion, obviously it's there with the bag
aspects, but old as well. Okay. Thank you very much".
Rob Collie (01:03:41):
Great.
Jen Stirrup (01:03:43):
And yes, I am interfering. You know I am.
Rob Collie (01:03:46):
Triple word score.
Jen Stirrup (01:03:50):
Exactly, and it's... For me, I just thought, "Okay, so it fits". It
was actually somebody I know that said that behind my back and they
told somebody else and they said, "So-and-so has said this about
you'll and I said, " Okay, that's fine. I am interfering,
absolutely. If I see something I don't like, I can realize that
being a staunch supporter of certain initiatives, of causes, can
make me appear interfering". If I feel strongly about something, I
will speak out and that can be cast fairly quickly into, "She's
interfering again. Who is she? She's an old bag". So I think that
phrase for me, made think about those two things. One is my age.
I'm 48.
Jen Stirrup (01:04:28):
So there's that and female as well. I thought whatever I was
interfering about, does it matter if I was right or not? Because
whatever I was interfering about has got lost somewhere and it's
got lost in the fact that my other characteristics were brought up
as well, rather than seeing, "Well, actually Jennifer is wrong
about something", which I could have accepted, I think. If someone
had said, "Actually, you've got that wrong", I would rather know
that, because then I can rethink or change my mind or perhaps give
an explanation and then it turns into an adult conversation then,
rather than back and forth. Which I don't want to do, I am not
interested. So I didn't engage with the individual. I thought, "I
can't change your mind, because if you're just going to bring up my
age and my gender, I'm not getting a good starting point. Maybe you
need to listen to someone else and see what they think".
Rob Collie (01:05:22):
How do you achieve that peace? I'm sorry to interrupt, but that's
just killing me. How have you reached the point or have you always
been like this? Teach me. Can you teach me that peace?
Jen Stirrup (01:05:35):
I think I got to the point of fatigue actually, where I realized
that no matter what I said or did, there was always going to be
haters who would always cast whatever I said or did in a bad light,
and it doesn't matter what I do or say, that will be twisted.
Someone wrote me a piece of hate mail recently on Instagram, which
said about, "You said something about this blog post, about this
person", and I said, "No, I didn't". And then I thought, "Should I
go back and ask them what was I supposed to have said and who
about?".
Jen Stirrup (01:06:05):
In the end I just wrote, "Thank you very much for getting in touch.
I appreciate it and I think we need to close the conversation
here". And I just left it because I thought, "Actually, I don't
know what's going on, but whatever it is, I'm going to lose". And I
think maybe I did start to lose in some ways, because I thought I
am just going to lose and I can keep being dragged around by other
people and it's spending energy. I don't know if you've ever read
The Art of War?
Rob Collie (01:06:31):
I have. Summaries of it anyway. I'm not sure that I've read the
whole thing, but it's not very long, is it?
Jen Stirrup (01:06:36):
It's not very long and there's a bit in it that really speaks to
me. It's the bit about... So obviously about war, but it talks
about strategy and it says that you should regard your enemies...
stand back from them and regard them as a boulder rolling down a
hill, and if you stand back, they will eventually run out of energy
because there's going to keep rolling. And the whole point about
you as that strategy person or a tactician, is that it's all about
timing and it's spending energy. And I realized actually, the best
thing I can do for myself is be very careful in how I spend my
energy and be very careful about my timing. So I think I've been
trying to ignore stuff online for quite some time. I'm not going to
pretend it hasn't been challenging or that it hasn't been a
hurtful. It's been both of those things.
Jen Stirrup (01:07:23):
And I think that, because it would speak out a refute to do
anything, people tend to believe bad things and they just think,
"Where did all of this come from?". I've come to the conclusion as
well that I think we talk a bit about mental health in the tech
community. I think that people are struggling and have sort of come
to the conclusion that some people who are throwing stones and
things are actually not in a good place, because if you're a happy
person you're not behaving like that.
Jen Stirrup (01:07:50):
I'm not seeing people are mentally ill, and even if it was, it's
not a bad thing to be a mentally ill or have mental health issues.
That's not what I think, it's not what I mean. I just think it's
coming back to asking questions again and timing to say, "Actually,
I'm going to stop behaving like that because that's not a normal or
proportionate way to behave, and I have to perhaps seek some help
from the right person. Whether that's a friend who's going to give
me a very honest answer or perhaps stepping outside my echo chamber
or my [inaudible 01:08:22] chorus, so that I get different
perspective".
Jen Stirrup (01:08:25):
And as humans we like to flock together in terms of who we like,
and also we go off into groups, perhaps through a shared interest
and that for a community, and that's a good thing. But sometimes
it's a bad thing. It's something I should probably mention before.
I've been speaking to the police for a long time, telling them
about online harassment, because some of it is really unpleasant
and some of it I have had to report to the police. I've been
dealing with the London Metropolitan Police and [inaudible
01:08:52]. We all have. I've handed them access to things like my
Facebook account so that they can see some of the stuff I am being
sent. I don't mean people seeing my Facebook messages. They are
deadly dull and boring. I do not live an interesting life. It tends
to be things like, "What would you like me to bring you back from
the shops?".
Jen Stirrup (01:09:12):
And what I have found is that there's much more sympathy for
victims of online bullying than there used to be, and it's too much
to the point. I've speaking much more closely and going through a
sort of community resolution process at the moment with someone. I
don't know who they are due to protection. Isn't telling you that.
But I have been speaking to the police where someone has been
caught, questioned, and they're going to write me a letter of
apology. And I think that is going to be tremendously huge for me,
because all I want is an apology that it's just not going to happen
again to me or to anyone else. So sometimes speaking up and
speaking out, you don't see results right away, but sometimes if
you stick at it, collect the data, collect the evidence, speak to
the right people, sometimes you can get a result.
Jen Stirrup (01:09:59):
In the minute I feel full of nervous energy about it. I'm not
pleased yet because I think it's going to take some time to uncoil
from all of that. But I think the point I'd like to make is, when
people are seeing things by other people online, there are
consequences for the victim, but to also see that for them
personally, there can be consequences as well. You know so somebody
has now to spend time in the police station, which is taking them
away from their work, they have to explain to the family, that kind
of thing. So I think what I'd like to see in the tech community is
more proportion, a sense of proportion. If I have upset somebody,
they need to talk to me directly. I will hear them out and if an
apology's due then yes, absolutely I would give someone an
apology.
Jen Stirrup (01:10:44):
I had to apologize to someone a few weeks ago. I said something
that inadvertently offended somebody. I had no idea. I was very
upset about it and I learned how that had been taken and wrote them
an apology in Facebook actually, which they accepted. But I wanted
to give them the opportunity to say their peace and I talk a lot
about people speaking up and speaking out, and I need to take it
when other people take the time to speak up and speak out against
me as well. And I did the right thing and I learned something about
how something came across. I'm really actually grateful that they
took the time to do that.
Rob Collie (01:11:17):
Just hearing you say these things live, it brings it home
viscerally in a way that really no other medium does it. It's the
cliche now in this increasingly hyperpolarized world, there are
people quote unquote, on your side of these issues who are
incredibly combative, unfriendly, non listening, right? There's
people on both sides, right? That are like this. I'm not saying
like, "Oh, it's the inclusion and diversity people that are so
terrible". We've got those people everywhere, but it's just so hard
to imagine talking to you, anyone characterizing you as a villain.
It's just jaw-dropping. If I disagreed with you on every single
thing in the world, I still... there's no way that I couldn't get
along with you.
Jen Stirrup (01:12:07):
Thank you.
Rob Collie (01:12:11):
I really, really, really don't get it.
Jen Stirrup (01:12:13):
I think some of it is perception and some of its proportion. I
think, as I've got older and I'm divorced... I've been through a
bad divorce, and I think it had been true so much in some ways that
I've suddenly developed a lot more empathy. And I think maybe you
develop more empathy as you get older. So maybe it's that. Maybe if
you spoke to 22 year old me, you would find a very different person
because I am opinionated about lots of things and I do interfere,
but I think maybe I've just got to learn a better balance between
knowing when people don't want to hear it anymore. And me realizing
that actually, you do need to speak up and speak out but when does
that stop? I've been thinking more about this in the past few days
actually. You can speak up and speak out, but maybe at some point I
have to get better at understanding some people are just not going
to listen.
Jen Stirrup (01:13:05):
And then that comes back to your previous question. How do you walk
away from that? And I think you kind of have to, to protect
yourself and maybe think about family members who are affected by
seeing you upset. I think the community needs a lot of healing. I
think past is appearing is not below any healing and I think
[inaudible 01:13:24] over topics which are maybe not constructive
and going to help anyone, is going to help. But I'm happy to talk
about things like diversity inclusion, intersection and equality
and inequality where people feel that perhaps there's something
they could apply or maybe help them to think. And I should add that
I am learning about these things all the time, and I can and I do
get it wrong because I talk and ask questions with people because I
am learning. And I'm very fortunate that people have been quite
patient with me I think.
Rob Collie (01:13:55):
I just want to, almost sarcastically, go, "Wait, wait, wait, wait,
wait, wait, wait. We're on the internet now. What is this humility
and 'maybe I don't have all the answers'-stance? Like you can't do
that. You've got to go out there and just bluff that you know
everything and you don't understand why everyone else can't figure
out something so simple". It's so easy on the internet to curate
one's own profile. When you're up close and personal with someone,
it's hard to hold it together. The human flaws that we all carry,
they just kind of leak out if you're in the vicinity of each other
and you're watching closely and if you're like working together in
person or whatever on a daily basis. But if you're an internet
personality or just really honestly, like everyone is becoming an
internet personality in some way, right?
Rob Collie (01:14:45):
If you have a social media account, you have the opportunity to
start broadcasting to the world a curated picture of your life.
That's very, very, very seductive. Like, "Ooh, I can put out there
only what I want people to see". You don't even need to consciously
think about it. And then you get all these examples of other people
who are doing it. It's almost like the prisoner's dilemma, right?
If everyone else is doing it, but the thing is, you don't know that
they're doing it, right? You see all these people that appear to be
so together and so you need to go out there. The pressure to go out
there and be the same, pretending that you have it all figured out,
is super high. It takes a lot of courage to go out there and say,
"Yeah, I'm figuring this out. Work in progress".
Jen Stirrup (01:15:28):
Yeah. I'd rather give an answer that's got integrity than pretended
expertise I don't really have. I wish I had better answers. And
maybe if you ask me in a year, I might have changed my mind. I
think people are in a bad place in many ways and I've tried to be
more thoughtful about actually maybe people are not accessing or
getting the support and help that they need and that is coming out
online. And maybe you just need a bigger sense of proportion that I
don't think we get online on social media.
Rob Collie (01:15:55):
When there's an audience, everything gets orders of magnitude more
toxic. For a while there, at a point in my life, operating my blog
was a big part of my professional existence. I would get trolls
that would come and attack out of left field for assuming just
sometimes like incredibly bizarre reasons that you wouldn't even
understand. I had a guy emailing my manager. They had tracked down
who my manager was at Microsoft because I was still working there
at the time and was emailing him that I had done something like I
had not done at all. Like, it was crazy. He thought I hacked his
PayPal or something. It was just totally out of the blue. He wasn't
part of this tech community at all, right? That's the most
egregious example, but I had an amazing, in the end, like an
amazing track record turning these trolls.
Rob Collie (01:16:39):
Engage with them one-on-one privately behind the scenes and don't
lead off with a punch. Lead off with, "Hey, hey, hey. What's what's
up here?". And it was amazing. My expectation going into all these
interactions was that this person is just unhinged, you know? And
they turned into great people. I think like 9 out of 10... I think
there was like one that didn't out of all the top 10 trolls from my
history of operating the blog, nine of them turned into people that
if I'm in their city, I'm going to say hi to them.
Jen Stirrup (01:17:09):
That's nice. I think you can try and give people an opportunity,
but I think the other side of it is me thinking I have to look
after my own mental health too. And I think it's better just to
say, "Hey. My email address is online. I'm here on LinkedIn.
There's always lot's of ways to get in touch with me. You can come
and talk to me, I know". And I think maybe as you get older, you're
better at picking your battles. Maybe it's a bit of that.
Rob Collie (01:17:34):
Yeah.
Jen Stirrup (01:17:34):
So I wish a [inaudible 01:17:37] face for people who are going
through that. I've just decided just to screenshot, block and move
on. And I feel that every blog post right now, I have to preface it
with "This is not about aimed at any individual. This is just some
observations about intersectionality". So I've got a blog that I
need to publish about that and the last paragraph is about, " I'm
not picking on anyone. I'm just trying to highlight an issue
that-"
Jen Stirrup (01:18:03):
I'm not picking on anyone. I'm just trying to highlight an issue
that is our various characteristics interact, and it's something
that for me talk about diversity and inclusion, we focus on women
in tech. And not that that's not a normal thing, because as it
tends focus on white women in tech, and I'd like to see a mixture,
women of color included as well. And a woman of color wrote to me
last week, she said, "I'd like to share some of my experiences with
you because women in tech is not including women of color." And
I've actually got a meeting with her next week. I don't know what I
can do or say, but I'm going to hopefully use it as a learning
experience. It's not that I've said anything bad. She just said,
"We're not talking about enough about women of color." And I feel
it's probably fair, and I think it's important message.
Thomas Larock (01:18:52):
So I want to make sure, Jen, that you understand that I want to
thank you for interfering. That's an important role that we all
have to play at times. It's one thing if you're just always
interfering for the sake of interfering, but when you see that
interference is necessary to advance, to make something better for
everyone, at the end of the day, we should all be looking to just
simply do good things for ourselves, but for each other. So
sometimes that interference is necessary. And I know you and I have
interfered with things and tried to get things to a better place,
and it's necessary and I don't want you to feel that you should
stop or that you're not supported. If you ever need a pick me up,
just call me and Rob, we'll spend a couple hours telling you how
great you are.
Jen Stirrup (01:19:41):
Thank you.
Thomas Larock (01:19:41):
But interfering is necessary. The thing about the online, like Rob
was talking about, I wanted to say to Rob, I think part of it is
that when you're online, there's a tendency to feel seen. And what
I mean is if I make a comment, and I've learned this over
specifically the last five to six years, if I just make some
comments about a behavior that I've witnessed that I think is bad,
inevitably somebody online thinks I am talking about them,
specifically. Like you probably think this tweet is about you,
don't you? And it's true. I can track things out. You've had those
trolls and I've had my share of trolls and abusers. And inevitably
it always comes down. I feel you're speaking to me about this and
therefore I'm going to stand up for myself. And I'm like, "How did
we get to that point where you see something online and you think
that person must be talking about you?" If that's the case, then
you need to do some inward reflection about what you're doing
instead of attacking the person for calling out a bad behavior. But
anyway ...
Rob Collie (01:20:51):
It's like the old joke, if you go to work every day and there's
like one or two assholes you run into, that's just normal. But if
you go to work every and everybody's an asshole, you're the
asshole.
Jen Stirrup (01:21:00):
I think it's a mix of confirmation biases. We've got these sort of
bases in our heads. One is I want to say Dunning-Kruger, but I
don't think that's right. And where we think we know more about
something that we do. And the think there's a related bias, which
I've forgotten the name of that, which is if we don't understand
something, we think it's going to harm us. And I think that the
bias is there if I've maybe put up a tweet or a blog post, they
haven't understood what I'm saying. So then some way of thinking,
she's out to harm me. And the two things together, I know a lot
about this and I don't understand what she said, she must be able
to harm me. And I think people are jumping and mixing biases. I've
got blog posts in my head and it's really something I try and
practice doing is, what do I see if I see something that I'm
uncomfortable with? I've got better over the years. It's saying,
excuse me.
Jen Stirrup (01:21:59):
And then, this is a Scottish thing, and I know people on the
podcast can't see it, but pointing your finger is actually very
Scottish thing. So I remember it being at [inaudible 01:22:08] a
few years ago, when some of their guys were making comments with
one of the female presenters and I pointed my finger at them and I
said, "I'm speaking to you, lot. What do you think you're saying?
Stop it." Now, I'm getting better at calling people out as I see
it, then I used to be. And I think maybe it's partly because I'm
more aware of it maybe but also I think maybe I'm seeing more of it
as well, so maybe there's that. And then it's just confidence to go
up and point fingers at people.
Jen Stirrup (01:22:37):
But I think something, a line I cultivate is, are you kidding me?
And that works everywhere. So anything that you've seen ever. And I
want to sort of blow post an axe at something I'm trying to get
better at. And the reason for that is I was in [inaudible 01:22:54]
a while ago and somebody said something against the Jewish person.
I live in an area with a lot of synagogues. And they said something
which I will not repeat and asked him if he was okay afterwards.
But I just didn't know what to say. And I thought, I now have to
practice situations where it will prepare me better for speaking
out when I see something which makes me uncomfortable. And it's a
sort of indicator of the world that we live in, that we have to
practice and have a stock series of phrases. And I love to blog
about this. And the reason I mention it is just because I'm still
figuring it all out. And I wish I knew a better way forward, but I
think that reacting to trolls, reacting to people online, reacting
when I see something, I think if you're a nice person, you're not
expecting something.
Rob Collie (01:23:42):
Yeah, it's surprising.
Jen Stirrup (01:23:43):
And it surprises you and it catches you off guard because you
think, "Well I never think like that. Where did that come
from?"
Rob Collie (01:23:48):
Just as a humorous aside, you mentioned that are you kidding me is
proven to be very effective. I have not found this to be very
effective in my marriage. It is exactly the wrong thing for me to
say, even though it is a go-to. I keep thinking that this will be
the time that this sentence works. No, it doesn't.
Jen Stirrup (01:24:08):
No I wouldn't recommend it to a spouse. I'm divorced.
Rob Collie (01:24:13):
So am I, so am I. This is marriage number two. I want this one to
work. It doesn't mean that are you kidding me is the move. Don't do
that.
Jen Stirrup (01:24:25):
Just if I see something. So if I saw that incident again on the
train where that man said something to that gentleman, it's pier
capping things on, I would be best to prepared now.
Thomas Larock (01:24:30):
I'll try it with Suzanne to get some more empirical evidence. We'll
see how it goes. I'll report back next podcast.
Jen Stirrup (01:24:37):
Suzanne is lovely. I don't think you'd ever have to say that to. I
remember meeting her and we discussed Scotland because she had
favorite TV programs.
Thomas Larock (01:24:45):
Yep.
Rob Collie (01:24:46):
Oh, I don't have to say it, either. It's not like it's justified.
I'm just, anyway, I think it's fair to acknowledge that my nine out
of 10 trolls story. All 10 of these trolls were male, shocking, I
know. I definitely benefited from being a guy while handling them.
There's a guy language and a guy code, and there's a lot of subtext
going on in an interaction between two men that is very different.
Whether we like it or not, it's very different when a woman is the
target of it, and the way that you deal with it. It's weird. Even
over the internet, there's this almost primal behavior going on.
There's this threat that's been signaled, and then if there's a man
on the other end, he turns around with some version of, "Oh
yeah."
Jen Stirrup (01:25:37):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (01:25:38):
And there's sort of a deescalation that happens at that moment. And
I don't really think that those tools are available to women in the
same way that it's available when it's a guy to guy interaction.
That's tricky.
Jen Stirrup (01:25:54):
You're taught to be fair and move.
Rob Collie (01:25:55):
Yeah. If you use exactly the same words that I do in an email
response, it's not going to come across the same way. It's not
going to get you the same result that it gets me.
Jen Stirrup (01:26:08):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (01:26:08):
I just basically said some version of, "Oh, okay. Oh, come on.
There's got to be some sort of ..." There's no doubt that your
success rate with those same words would be different than
mine.
Jen Stirrup (01:26:17):
Yeah, it can work either way, I think. Sometimes it's just like the
old bag is speaking. I'm not going to listen to her. But the other
side of it is, "Hang on a minute. She actually said something to
me." And that can cause a reaction. So sometimes it can work either
way. It's quite hard to know. And I think trying to codify that
into a checklist is quite hard. But I just thought, how can I best
get better at dealing with these situations? Because I think as we
come back to the world after COVID, we'll probably see more of this
similar misunderstandings. And a few years ago, I tried to set up a
decency charter and a code of conduct in [inaudible 01:26:55] . And
I was surprised because not that many people adopted it. I think
only two organizations did. And I thought with a decency chart or
say something like, "We will be inclusive. We welcome everyone
regardless of color and age and everything else." I put that
together. And people wouldn't sign up to it. And I thought, "How
can you not? How can you not" I don't know.
Rob Collie (01:27:17):
I want to go read it. And I want to go find all of the incredibly
controversial content that I object to in this charter. I'm just
kidding.
Jen Stirrup (01:27:29):
I know.
Rob Collie (01:27:29):
I'm expecting it to be a hundred percent obvious innocuous. I can't
wait to say, "Oh hell no, we're not adopting this."
Jen Stirrup (01:27:44):
I'm going to throw it out. That's getting a red pen through it.
Thomas Larock (01:27:47):
Rob, our blog posts will just be, "Are you kidding me? Are you
kidding me?"
Rob Collie (01:27:54):
I've even, by the way, on Facebook a long time ago, I made a fake
dashboard of all of the buttons and levers available to me in a
conversation in my marriage and giving them all labels. But there's
this one giant button in the middle of the dashboard that's, are
you kidding me? It sort of represents me just failing over and over
again.
Thomas Larock (01:28:21):
Put that in the show.
Rob Collie (01:28:22):
The completely stupid rob dashboard for ... anyway.
Jen Stirrup (01:28:31):
Yeah, I was just trying to find stock phrases that I could just
have in my head to respond with really quickly. Where I could just,
if I see something. There's that and another one is which I find
works if I'm getting harassed in the street or something, is I just
say, "Oh, grow up." No one can say anything when they're told to
grow up. I've never, ever had a good answer. So say I'm just
walking around, minding my own business, walking with a laptop and
going back to my car. And somebody wolf whistles. I'll just say,
"Oh grow up." And I've never had a good answer to that, ever. What
I'd like to do is find these phrases. Where if I see something, it
makes people stop and think. I don't know, I wish I had a better
answer. I'm still trying to figure so much out and I think I'll
figure it all out and then I'll day the next day or something.
There's so much to learn.
Rob Collie (01:29:17):
I know, and all this acquired wisdom, you start to like really
cherish it. Like I badly, badly, badly want to share as much of it
as I possibly can with my children. It seems like such a waste to
develop it and then it's all lost. Like Roy Batty said like tears
in rain at the end of Blade Runner. You mentioned sort of having
these stock phrases on speed dial. I read one time about this guy
who had been in prison for a long time. And he says 20 years later
after being out of prison, he still has this five punch combination
that he memorized for himself on speed dial. At any moment's time,
he remembers exactly what it is. He had to have that to
survive.
Jen Stirrup (01:29:56):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (01:29:57):
Not a good sign.
Jen Stirrup (01:29:58):
No, it's not.
Rob Collie (01:29:59):
When you need these things.
Jen Stirrup (01:30:00):
Yeah, and we shouldn't need them, but it's unfortunate that we do.
And [inaudible 01:30:05] do self-defense classes. They're so
helpful.
Rob Collie (01:30:13):
So you're up to like a two to three punch combination now. Takes a
little while to get to five, I suppose.
Jen Stirrup (01:30:18):
Someone tried to mock me in my local village. I'd got some sausage
rolls for my son and had them in a little bag, in a baker's bag.
And this guy came towards me and I thought, [inaudible 01:30:30]
with his fingers. And I thought, "He's going to mug me to get my
thing." I got nervous. And then I remembered all the self-defense
training. One of my friends is a former Olympian for the UK in
karate. And she's very much about, you need to be on your guard all
the time. I attend her lessons and I'm not very graceful at any of
it. But he tried to grab my bag. And she taught me, use your elbow.
And all that stuff because it's muscle memory because I practice
every week. I'm trying to lose weight. So I hit someone in the nose
with my elbow and he jumped back because it didn't expect it. So
he's twice my height and half my age and it's the last thing he
expected me to do. And as he came forward, invited himself, I
punched him in the temple and the side of the face. And I'm
laughing now, but at the time I was absolutely terrified. And it
wasn't worth it over the sausage rolls. I should've just given them
up, but just the fact that we have to be on our guard all the
time.
Jen Stirrup (01:31:28):
And if he'd said to me, "I'm hungry and homeless and penniless," I
would have given him it. But just the fact that he didn't look any
of those things. I think he just thought, perception, older female,
I'm going to take whatever she's got in her bag. So when I punched
him and he fell to the ground, actually, and I just walked away.
And I guess that I never thought I would ever need self-defense,
but I think these things that we see sometimes in our daily life
are showing us that we do need some form of self defense against
seeing things and empowering ourselves to see something when we do.
BEcause I think that's one of the hardest things is speaking up and
speaking out. And I know I talk about it a lot, but I find it
tough.
Jen Stirrup (01:32:14):
And I guess my lesson here is can we develop some sort of
self-defense when you look at community events where we have got a
code of conduct and my decency charter. It doesn't have to have my
name on it. I don't care if it does or it doesn't. I just want
people to feel welcome and that we are doing self-defense and other
defense if we see something. Because it's a shame because as Tom
and I know, we spend hours if not days that pass talking about anti
harassment. And we developed, I think, a great piece of work on
that. I think that's something, a past legacy that we should be
incredibly proud of actually, because we put so much work into it.
Was it perfect? No, but we're back to 80/20 again. It covered 80%
of cases, edge cases sometimes not so much, but that's why the red
cases, because there was the things that you maybe, or I didn't
think of, maybe tried to be as prepared as we could. And I think
it's almost like we need one of those for everyday life.
Rob Collie (01:33:11):
You got in a physical altercation.
Jen Stirrup (01:33:15):
Yes, I did.
Rob Collie (01:33:17):
It sounds like you're knocked him out. Down he went.
Thomas Larock (01:33:21):
What I took away was she left him for dead.
Jen Stirrup (01:33:26):
Yeah.
Rob Collie (01:33:28):
She walked away to go after his family.
Jen Stirrup (01:33:34):
Walked away because it was me scooting away, because I thought I'm
just going to scoot away because I've done this and I'm
embarrassed. And I was full of adrenaline and I didn't want to run
because then you look like you're guilty. Whereas he was coming
after me. So I turned back about halfway down the street and he was
dusting himself off. And actually a few weeks later I was in High
Street and someone stopped me and they said, "I saw what happened
with that guy. He's been doing that for some time and somebody
needed to teach him a lesson."
Rob Collie (01:33:59):
So you interfered.
Jen Stirrup (01:34:00):
I interfered.
Rob Collie (01:34:03):
You interfered with the normal order of events, which is him
harassing people and taking their stuff.
Jen Stirrup (01:34:09):
I mean, change not too much. What's your bio, actually. I think
I've now made a life objective to be an interfering old bag.
Rob Collie (01:34:17):
So are there any sort of pithy, short tips that you would provide
to organizations, sort of like easy things to remember, easy things
to do, new habits to develop or old habits to discard that can
advance the cause of inclusivity?
Jen Stirrup (01:34:35):
Be kind. The reason I say that is because I was on customer set a
few years ago and I witnessed something and I'd rather not say what
it was, but there was an incident I was unhappy with and nobody
stuck up for that person. And it's just sometimes in technology
companies, there isn't that culture of speaking out. And I thought,
"Well, I'm going to speak out on behalf of that person." And I
wrote a report, actually. They asked me to write up a report about
it, which I did. And I said that, I should try and find it, but
wrote this phrase about acting with kindness.
Jen Stirrup (01:35:06):
I think the other thing I think is something that Mark Sousa used
to say a lot is that destiny that joins the passport and it has
helped me so much is assume good intentions. So for me and other
interfering old bags, that I need to remember to look for the good
intentions. Because I think I can be quite a negative person and
I'm not always looking for those. And I think that was an
incredibly wise thing. Yeah, I've forgotten the actual phrase which
I gave to that customer. But I did say something along the lines
of, and I actually suggested even ambassadors of kindness because
the culture was really unpleasant. I shouldn't have to tell
companies this, right?
Rob Collie (01:35:47):
No.
Jen Stirrup (01:35:48):
Anyway, I left and I don't know if he did anything.
Rob Collie (01:35:51):
So many table stakes. Here's one, I haven't taught a class in a
long time, but I used to teach all the time. And one of my
observations from teaching classes in DAX and data modeling, power
BI, whatever, is that the population of students in the room was
always at least 50% female. On average, over time, it was slightly
higher than 50% female. So the quantity was 50/50. And then
quality-wise, my guess as to who the best student was in the class
at the end of a couple of days was again, coin flippy, whether the
person who I thought was probably the most promising half the time
male, half the time female. And yet our company, the people who
apply for jobs with us, overwhelmingly male.
Rob Collie (01:36:36):
I feel a number of things about this. First of all, I just feel
that it's a terrible shame. There's something wrong here. You
talking about women in tech and all of that, usually you don't
start from a baseline like 50/50. We're in this place where we have
an amazing baseline. We're already in a great spot. You mentioned
things like asking the right questions and everything. I actually
think that, might be unpopular to say it, but I actually think
women are probably better on average at formulating questions than
men. The talent base is there. Where are we failing?
Jen Stirrup (01:37:05):
Yeah, I think there's a few things happening. I tend to get lots of
job applications of people speculatively finding CVs, and the sense
you get a lot of women and people from LGTB backgrounds as well
applying. And I think maybe some of it is about positioning the
company. So if you position it as, "Yeah, we're all about the data.
We're all about the technology. But there's our mission in there."
Because I do work for DataKind who are a data science charity. They
always get 50% new female inclusion and I don't really want to see
50/50 because some people are non binary as well. So there's a
healthy representation there, I think. I'm not non binary, but we
are attracting people from at least three genders and that's good
thing. But I think the reason for that is I get some tacitly,
technically astonishing women are doing fantastic things. And I
think it's about the way that it's maybe marketed as being
inclusive and secondly helping people and having a really good
impact.
Jen Stirrup (01:38:09):
I think people tend to be incentivized in the workplace is that
they're having a good impact or perhaps being salary motivated. And
if you go in more with the mission and the purpose, then that's a
good thing. I mean, that's just I'd have to look at your company
website or any company website. But I think some of it is what do
you blog about? Are you just maybe talking about technology or are
you talking about making things better somewhere for somebody. And
maybe that's quite general, but when I go into Datakinds data dive
and I'm sat with at least 50% women, they are harnessing people of
all different backgrounds. And I think it's about that we have a
mission. We and our skills and technology expertise are part of us,
but we're here all with a common purpose. And I think the tech
community needs that as well.
Jen Stirrup (01:38:57):
I've often said I'd love to see Microsoft Ignite, for example,
doing a Data Hackathon Day. And I think they've tried something
like this sped would think it was dialed up enough. I would love to
see them partner with Datakind as an example and do something
really good over the course of a conference like that. I think I
had the idea sort of after we left Pass. So don't think it was
something I did as part of Pass. But the thing is, people will
build a sense of community and the get better technical skills
because they're interacting with people of all sorts of
backgrounds.
Jen Stirrup (01:39:29):
One of the guys on my team is at Cambridge, University of Cambridge
PhD doing a post-doc in genomics research. And he was doing
location mapping for one of the charities that we were working for.
And he was just phenomenally brilliant. I think when you deal with
people like that donating their time for a cause, they tend to be
nice people because they want to help. And I think technical
community, speaking generally, it doesn't always have that. It's
like, who's this serving? Is it serving our company? Is it serving
the individual because they're building their career? I think when
you talk with tech community, it's about, "Yay, come present and
you'll increase your career skills and your technical skills." What
about saying something like, "Hey, come along and you can help
people. You can have a charity. You can have an impact in people
you'll never meet." I think I'd like to see more
collaborations.
Rob Collie (01:40:19):
Jen, thank you so much. I've really enjoyed, but I've also just
really appreciated this conversation.
Jen Stirrup (01:40:25):
Thanks so much.
Announcer (01:40:26):
Thanks for listening to the Raw Data by P3 Adaptive podcast. Let
the experts at P3 Adaptive help your business. Just go to
P3adaptive.com. Have a data day!