Power

Adobe’s Digital Experience chief on how to navigate a cookieless future

Anil Chakravarthy explains why digital transformation isn't slowing down, and why "first-party data" should be words to live by.

Anil Chakravarthy, the executive vice president and general manager of Adobe's Digital Experience business

Anil Chakravarthy runs Adobe's Digital Experience team, and would like to talk to you about first-party data.

Photo: Adobe

Anil Chakravarthy joined Adobe at a unique moment. And that's putting it lightly. Chakravarthy, the executive vice president and general manager of Adobe's Digital Experience business, started at the company in January 2020 and two months later found himself leading a team at the center of a massive pandemic-necessitated digital transformation.

For the next year, Chakravarthy said, his job and Adobe's was just to help wherever they could. He said he saw two kinds of companies: the ones that had relatively stable businesses but had to do a decade's worth of digital change in no time flat, and the ones that saw their business more or less flatline. Now, as businesses and people begin to emerge from the pandemic, Chakravarthy said he has a new job: to help companies grow in a market that looks hotter every day.

But there's another crisis coming for the industry: the transition away from cookies created by Google and others, the new privacy-focused features led by Apple and a regulatory environment increasingly hostile to the kind of massive data collection that so many industries have relied on.

Chakravarthy and I recently sat down to talk about all those changes, why he doesn't think digital transformation is going to slow down post-pandemic and whether anybody knows anything about the cookieless future. (Repeat after me: First. Party. Data.)

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.

One thing Adobe has done differently in this space is you've just tried to build a much more complete solution. I talk to a lot of folks who are building data and marketing platforms, and they're thinking about how to do APIs and integrate with other services and build a big partnership business. It seems like you're focused on how to make the surface area of the core platform as big as possible because that's just what it requires. Is that fair?

That's 100% right. Think about it this way: Let's say the average [marketing tech] company has an average deal size of $100,000. So if you're a customer who spends a million dollars on martech, you have 10 companies that you're working with already, right? Now, think about it. You are a customer using 10 products from 10 companies, which all have their own roadmaps, which all have their own preferences and biases. And some of them overlap with each other. Some of them complement each other. Each of them is evolving and trying to jostle for space and attention. So you as a customer suddenly realize that for a million dollars of spend, you're probably now spending 10x that just putting it together. You are a system integrator now, keeping it going.

Customers say three-quarters of their budget is just keeping the lights on. But those companies have no incentive — everybody says that of course partnerships make sense, but ultimately, the customer has to make it work for them.

So we'll be looking at it and saying, "Hey, if the customer is trying to look at a critical set of channels, there is a critical set of marketing activities that need to happen, and there's a critical set of data about customers that needs to be not only brought together but well-managed and governed and private and secure and so on." If I have 10 different applications, which are approaching data management separately, which have their own data silos, and so on and so forth, at some point I'm just treading water at best. And that's not even a big company! What if you have a $100 million martech budget? At that point, I mean, you're just like a system integrator. That's all you're doing.

It does seem like, all over tech, people are gravitating back to things that feel like all-in-one solutions. It's a total rebundling trend.

Yeah, exactly. I think it's been particularly pronounced in martech, too. Partly because maybe it is true that in martech there's a lot of innovation, which is great. There's a lot of different ways of doing things, which is also great. But it led to a lot of experiments, right? And it's great to do some experiments, but you can't run a big company on experiments. A collection of science projects is still a collection of science projects.

OK, let's talk about cookies. I've talked to all kinds of people who are in this position of feeling like the future of analytics in general, and cookieless life in particular, is sort of this existential crisis that no one yet understands. Everything's going to be different at some point, but nobody knows how and nobody knows when, so there's just this sort of latent panic over the industry. What are you telling folks right now? Are you beating down people's doors being like, "You need to get ready for the future?!?!?"

Yes.

Every CMO we talk to, every senior executive we talk to, we say, "Look, this is here." This is here now, and for a variety of reasons, right? You've already seen Apple, with what they have done. And Google is very serious about where they are headed with Chrome, and for good reason. The timeline might vary, but it's not going to be an indefinite extension. And so the way digital marketing happens has to change, and has to change substantially.

So, yeah, we are beating the drum as much as we can. And we think, especially now as people come closer to the deadline, and as also people come close out of the pandemic, there's a lot more attention being paid.

What are you telling them? Do we know what it will look like on the other side of this?

We do. There are companies that have already had some of this data. For example, member-oriented companies. You have a membership organization, and you know every member ID — it's not a new idea; membership-oriented companies have been around for hundreds of years. Those kinds of companies have always collected data; that's basically first-party data. So you really then have to gravitate towards first-party data.

You could then say, "Hey, I have other data, other things that I do with prospects, but I just can't keep somebody as an 'unidentified prospect' for too long." That was the thing that we had in the world of cookies: that somebody could kind of stay anonymous or semi-anonymous, and I could still do things with them. The main big difference is going to be that consumers are going to quickly realize that, because everybody's doing that. So from a consumer's perspective, I have to decide whether I'm going to identify myself to you as a business, and if I value you enough to identify myself so that you can then tell me what you're trying to sell me, and whether it's worth giving up my information in order to do that.

So the consumer has to make that decision a little bit earlier in the cycle, and then you, as a business, have to then use that data responsibly. The answer is not rocket science, right? You have to have first-party data, you have to have the consent of the person providing you the data. And then you have to make sure that the business processes in which you're using the data, including digital marketing and so on, are consistent with the consent you've received.

But that's easy to say, and much harder to do.

I was just going to say! On the one hand, requiring consumers to willingly give you data much earlier in the process, coupled with the fact that people are getting both more suspicious of anyone wanting to take their data and better at protecting that data, raises the stakes and the bar for success for a lot of these companies in a huge way. Especially for the folks who are not accustomed to doing things like member programs, they're going to have to totally change the way that they think about how they interact with customers. Right?

I completely agree with you. It's a massive change. But we've seen massive changes before, where consumer behavior has changed significantly pretty quickly. Digital marketing is one of the key ingredients of our digital economy. So both the marketer and the consumer will arrive at this kind of equilibrium pretty quickly.

Do your customers understand how that new relationship is supposed to work? Data collection has always been done kind of covertly and behind the scenes, and it's a very different kind of relationship when it is thrust out into the open. And I wonder how long it's going to take — for both sides, really — to understand how that relationship is supposed to work.

Many of our larger customers who operate internationally, because of GDPR, they're already there. And then many of the customers in California, with CCPA, they're kind of already there. I think the big "aha" that we have seen in the last couple of years is that people say, "Tracking — I let the data move, people within the business do what they need to do, and then I track what is potential privacy issue or violation and so on — I can't do that, that's too difficult. So I have to do it at the source." In other words, I have to make sure I have better controls when I gather the data. I have to have better controls over distributing the data for use.

If I can do it at source, then I don't have to worry about, "Hey, this marketing campaign should not have gone to customer A, B and C." Because I know that by the time they got access to their data, it had already gone through those filters. From us from our perspective, that's what's built in. It's called DULE: data usage labeling and entitlement. And that basically governs what data a marketer has access to, via which channel. Again, it's not easy, because it means a big change in how the process has worked in the past. But it's really the best way of addressing the new requirements and handling first-party data responsibly.

What is your sense of the timeline on all of this? I mean, obviously, we just spent the last 15 months accelerating what feels like five years of change. Will the next 15 months be another five years?

I think the next year and a half is going to be as packed as the last year and a half was. What people are going to realize is that some of them will have to reprioritize the second-half budget in order to focus on this. Almost everybody will say, "Hey, I'll do a pilot in my second half. But I really have to bake this into my 2022 budget, and make sure that I invest in 2022 for this transition." We definitely see clear evidence of customers saying they need to prioritize this.

Data privacy seems like the most moving of all the moving targets here. Whether it's going to get settled through legislative means or otherwise, how are you thinking about where we're headed?

I think the first-party data is always the cleanest, right? If I have your authorization, and I got the data directly from you, and you told me what you want to use it for, that is the cleanest. So that's the sweet spot. So let's try to get as much as possible there.

Then from there, you sort of widen the circle. I have first-party data, but I had to get it through other things. Maybe I can't do it in one shot, but as I engage with you, can I collect your consent? Then, second-party data is a little bit harder. I have to make sure if I get the data, even before I use it the first time, I have to get some consent from you. So I think it's going to be a phase of evolution where we do that, but I think it's going to move in concert with the privacy changes.

But ultimately, there is a huge incentive for everybody to make this work. Because virtually everything is digital. And if you can make this work, it'll have a significant impact.

LA is a growing tech hub. But not everyone may fit.

LA has a housing crisis similar to Silicon Valley’s. And single-family-zoning laws are mostly to blame.

As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers, whose high salaries put them at an advantage in both LA's renting and buying markets.

Photo: Nat Rubio-Licht/Protocol

LA’s tech scene is on the rise. The number of unicorn companies in Los Angeles is growing, and the city has become the third-largest startup ecosystem nationally behind the Bay Area and New York with more than 4,000 VC-backed startups in industries ranging from aerospace to creators. As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers. The city is quickly becoming more and more like Silicon Valley — a new startup and a dozen tech workers on every corner and companies like Google, Netflix, and Twitter setting up offices there.

But with growth comes growing pains. Los Angeles, especially the burgeoning Silicon Beach area — which includes Santa Monica, Venice, and Marina del Rey — shares something in common with its namesake Silicon Valley: a severe lack of housing.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.

While there remains debate among economists about whether we are officially in a full-blown recession, the signs are certainly there. Like most executives right now, the outlook concerns me.

In any case, businesses aren’t waiting for the official pronouncement. They’re already bracing for impact as U.S. inflation and interest rates soar. Inflation peaked at 9.1% in June 2022 — the highest increase since November 1981 — and the Federal Reserve is targeting an interest rate of 3% by the end of this year.

Keep Reading Show less
Nancy Sansom

Nancy Sansom is the Chief Marketing Officer for Versapay, the leader in Collaborative AR. In this role, she leads marketing, demand generation, product marketing, partner marketing, events, brand, content marketing and communications. She has more than 20 years of experience running successful product and marketing organizations in high-growth software companies focused on HCM and financial technology. Prior to joining Versapay, Nancy served on the senior leadership teams at PlanSource, Benefitfocus and PeopleMatter.

Policy

SFPD can now surveil a private camera network funded by Ripple chair

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a policy that the ACLU and EFF argue will further criminalize marginalized groups.

SFPD will be able to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks in certain circumstances.

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Ripple chairman and co-founder Chris Larsen has been funding a network of security cameras throughout San Francisco for a decade. Now, the city has given its police department the green light to monitor the feeds from those cameras — and any other private surveillance devices in the city — in real time, whether or not a crime has been committed.

This week, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved a controversial plan to allow SFPD to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks during life-threatening emergencies, large events, and in the course of criminal investigations, including investigations of misdemeanors. The decision came despite fervent opposition from groups, including the ACLU of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which say the police department’s new authority will be misused against protesters and marginalized groups in a city that has been a bastion for both.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Enterprise

These two AWS vets think they can finally solve enterprise blockchain

Vendia, founded by Tim Wagner and Shruthi Rao, wants to help companies build real-time, decentralized data applications. Its product allows enterprises to more easily share code and data across clouds, regions, companies, accounts, and technology stacks.

“We have this thesis here: Cloud was always the missing ingredient in blockchain, and Vendia added it in,” Wagner (right) told Protocol of his and Shruthi Rao's company.

Photo: Vendia

The promise of an enterprise blockchain was not lost on CIOs — the idea that a database or an API could keep corporate data consistent with their business partners, be it their upstream supply chains, downstream logistics, or financial partners.

But while it was one of the most anticipated and hyped technologies in recent memory, blockchain also has been one of the most failed technologies in terms of enterprise pilots and implementations, according to Vendia CEO Tim Wagner.

Keep Reading Show less
Donna Goodison

Donna Goodison (@dgoodison) is Protocol's senior reporter focusing on enterprise infrastructure technology, from the 'Big 3' cloud computing providers to data centers. She previously covered the public cloud at CRN after 15 years as a business reporter for the Boston Herald. Based in Massachusetts, she also has worked as a Boston Globe freelancer, business reporter at the Boston Business Journal and real estate reporter at Banker & Tradesman after toiling at weekly newspapers.

Fintech

Kraken's CEO got tired of being in finance

Jesse Powell tells Protocol the bureaucratic obligations of running a financial services business contributed to his decision to step back from his role as CEO of one of the world’s largest crypto exchanges.

Photo: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Kraken is going through a major leadership change after what has been a tough year for the crypto powerhouse, and for departing CEO Jesse Powell.

The crypto market is still struggling to recover from a major crash, although Kraken appears to have navigated the crisis better than other rivals. Despite his exchange’s apparent success, Powell found himself in the hot seat over allegations published in The New York Times that he made insensitive comments on gender and race that sparked heated conversations within the company.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Latest Stories
Bulletins