Analyse de données
Des conférenciers qui transforment les données complexes en stratégie claire, aidant les organisations à décider sur la base de faits plutôt que d’intuition
Speakers Associates represents 52 speakers on Analyse de données, including Limor Ziv, Daniel Trabucchi & Tommaso Buganza, Dr Sidney Shapiro, Theresa Payton, Dr Karen Nelson-Field PhD, Timandra Harkness, Karen Eber, Kieran Gilmurray, Joerg Niessing, et Didem Ün Ateş.
Digital transformation programmes routinely fail not from lack of investment but from lack of decision sequence. Most organisations cannot articulate which five or six choices determine whether a transformation delivers or stalls. Without that clarity, investment in platforms and AI becomes activity without architecture.
Most strategic planning assumes a single, most-likely future. Organisations that fail mid-execution are often those with the best plans – built on one scenario rather than a map of probable outcomes. When conditions shift, teams that have modelled uncertainty act; those that have not, freeze.
Net zero commitments have outrun the engineering and capital plans behind them. In aviation, motorsport, shipping and heavy transport, the existing fleet runs on liquid hydrocarbons and will for decades. Boards now need a credible answer for how to decarbonise that fleet without waiting for full electrification, and the engineering decisions made in the next three years will define which industries lead the transition and which import the technology from elsewhere.
Short-term metrics now dominate marketing decisions. The channels easiest to measure – performance advertising, digital activation, last-click attribution – are typically the ones least effective at building pricing power and long-term profit. Organisations are optimising their way to brand decline while the data required to argue otherwise sits unused.
Most organisations cannot tell the difference between automation that works in a controlled environment and automation that transforms operations at scale. The gap between a proof of concept and a million deployed robots is a systems design problem, not a technology one. Leaders who understand that distinction make sharper decisions about where autonomous systems create genuine value – and where they create expensive distraction.
Most organisations are better at spotting confirmed talent than undervalued talent, and better at celebrating success than questioning why it happened. The result is predictable. They overpay for proven names, miss the people and ideas that would actually move performance, and slide into complacency the moment a strategy starts working.
Consumer behaviour is moving faster than most planning cycles can absorb. Marketing, brand and innovation teams have more data than ever and less confidence about which signals to act on. The hard question is not what is trending; it is which shifts are durable enough to redesign a product, a category or a customer experience around.
Organisations deploying AI in high-stakes decisions typically believe their governance frameworks are adequate. The evidence says otherwise: most widely used bias detection tools do not satisfy the legal standards they are meant to address, and explainability is frequently promised but rarely delivered in a form that holds up to regulatory scrutiny. Boards are making accountability commitments about AI that the technical systems underneath those commitments cannot actually keep.
Most enterprise AI programmes are stuck between an executive mandate to deploy and an operating reality that cannot absorb the change. Boards want commercial returns. Workforces want to know what happens to them. Risk and compliance want to know how the model decides. The leaders running these programmes need someone who has actually shipped AI inside large companies, not someone describing the journey from outside.
Senior teams now drown in data and still make confident decisions on weak evidence. The problem is rarely access to numbers. It is the unexamined intuitions, framing errors and innovation theatre that turn good information into bad calls. Leaders need a sharper toolkit for reasoning under uncertainty, and a willingness to learn from the failures their organisations would prefer to forget.
Productivity has not recovered. Engagement scores have flatlined, HR technology budgets have grown, and yet the link between what people do and what the business produces has weakened. The question for the people function is no longer whether to invest in workforce experience, analytics or AI, but how to connect those investments to measurable performance.