10 D i g ital Tr ansformation and C han g es in C o nsumer B ehav ior Introduction Digital transformation is one of the most significant activities of the early twenty-first century. Digital transformation is defined as “ the changes associated with the applications of digital technology in all aspects of human society” (Stolterman & Fors, 2004, p. 689). From a business perspective, digital transformation enables organizations to implement new types of innovations and to rethink business processes that can take advantage of technology. From this perspective, digital transformation involves a type of reengineering, but one that is not limited to rethinking just how systems work together, but rather, that extends to the entire business itself. Some see digital transformation as the elimination of paper in organizations. Others see it as revamping a business to meet the demands of a digital economy. This chapter provides a link between digital transformation and what I call “ digital reengineering.” To explain this better, think of process reengineering as the generation that brought together systems in the way that they talked to one another— that is, the integration of legacy systems with new application that used more robust software applications. The advent of digital transformation requires the entire organization to meet the digital demands of their consumers. For some companies, the ­ usiness-to-business), that is, the consumer is another company (B2B, or b consumer is a provider to another company that inevitably supports a consumer. For other businesses, their consumer is indeed the ultimate buyer. I will discuss the differences in these two types of consumer concepts later in this chapter. What is important from an IT perspective is that reengineering is no longer limited to just the needs of the internal user, but rather the needs of the businesses consumer as well. So, systems must change, 2 51 252 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY as necessary, with the changes in consumer behavior. The challenge with doing this, of course, is that consumer needs are harder to obtain and understand, and can differ significantly among groups, depending on variables, such as ethnicity, age, and gender, to name just a few. As a result, IT managers need to interact with the consumer more directly and in partnership with their business colleagues. The consumer represents a new type of user for IT staff. The consumer, in effect, is the buyer of the organization’ s products and services. The challenge becomes how to get IT more engaged with the buyer community, which could require IT to be engaged in multiple parts of the business that deals with the consumer. Below are six approaches, which are not mutually exclusive of each other: 1. Sales/Marketing : These individuals sell to the company’ s buyers. Thus, they have a good sense of what customers are looking for, what things they like about the business, and what they dislike. The power of the sales and marketing team is their ability to drive realistic requirements that directly impact revenue opportunities. The limitation of this resource is that it still relies on an internal perspective of the consumer; that is, how the sales and marketing staff perceive the consumer’ s needs. 2. Third-party market analysis/reporting : There are outside resources available that examine and report on market trends within various industry sectors. Such organizations typically have massive databases of information and, using various search and analysis tools, can provide a better understanding of the behavior patterns of an organization’ s consumers. These third parties can also provide reports that show how the organization stacks up against its competition and why consumers may be choosing alternative products. Unfortunately, if the data is inaccurate it likely will result in false generalizations about consumer behavior, so it is critical that IT digital leaders ensure proper review of the data integrity. 3. Predictive analytics : This is a hot topic in today’ s competitive landscape for businesses. Predictive analytics is the process of feeding off large data sets (big data) and predicting future D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 253 behavior patterns. Predictive analytics approaches are usually handled internally with assistance from third-party products or consulting services. The limitation is one of risk— the risk that the prediction does not occur as planned. 4. Consumer support departments: Internal teams and external vendors (outsourced managed service) have a good pulse on consumer preferences because they interact with them. More specifically, these department respond to questions, hande problems and get feedback from consumers on a regular basis. These support departments typically depend on applications to help the buyer. As a result, they are an excellent resource for providing up-to-date things that the system does not provide consumers. Unfortunately, consumer support organizations limit their needs to what they experience as opposed to what might be future trends of their consumers. 5. Surveys: IT and the business can design surveys (questionnaires) and send them to consumers for feedback. Using surveys can be of significant value in that the questions can target specific issues that the organization wants to address. Survey design and administration can be handled by thirdparty firms, which may have an advantage in that the questions are being forwarded from an independent source and one that does not identify the interested company. On the other hand, this might be considered a negative— it all depends on what the organization is seeking to obtain from the buyer. 6. Focus groups: This approach is similar to the use of a survey. Focus groups are commonly used to understand consumer behavior patterns and preferences. They are often conducted by outside firms. The differences between the focus group and a survey are (1) surveys are very quantitative based and use scoring mechanisms (Likert scales) to evaluate outcomes. Consumers sometimes may misinterpret the question thus resulting in distorted feedback, and (2) focus groups are more qualitative and allow IT digital leaders to engage with the consumer in two-way dialogues. 25 4 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY Figure 10.1 reflects a graphic depiction of the sources for understanding consumer behaviors and needs. Table 10.1 further articulates the methods and deliverables that IT digital leaders should consider when developing system strategies. Requirements without Users and without Input Could it be possible to develop digital strategies and requirements for a system without user input or even consumer opinions? Could this be a reality for future design of strategic systems? Perhaps we need to take a step back historically and think about trends that have changed the competitive landscape. Digital transformation may indeed be the most powerful agent of change in the history of business. Surveys Internal/external targeted consumers Consumer support departments Internal support groups, third-party call centers, shared services organization Focus groups Internal/external consumer sessions Sales/marketing Product requirements Staff competitive analysis Third-party studies and databases Trends Data analysts Predictive analytics Figure 10.1 Sources for understanding consumer behavior. D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON Table 10.1 ANALYST’ S SOURCES Sales/ Marketing Langer’ s Methods and Deliverables for Assessing Consumer Needs METHODS Interviews Win/loss sales reviews Third-Party Databases Support Department 255 Document reports reviews Data analysis Predictive analytics Interviews Data/reports Surveys Internal and external questionnaires Focus Groups Hold internal and external sessions DELIVERABLES Should be conducted in a similar way to typical end user interviews. Work closely with senior sales staff. Set up interviews with key business stakeholders. Review the results of sales efforts. Many firms hold formal win/loss review meetings that may convey important limitations of current applications and system capabilities. Obtain summaries of the trends in consumer behavior and pinpoint shortfalls that might exist in current applications and systems. Perform targeted analytics on databases to uncover trends not readily conveyed in available reports. Interrogate data by using analytic formulas that may enable predictive trends in consumer behavior. Interview key support department personnel (internal and third party) to identify possible application deficiencies. Review call logs and recorded calls between consumers and support personnel to expose possible system deficiencies. Work with internal departments to determine application issues when they support consumers. Use similar surveys with select populations of customers to validate and fine-tune internal survey results. Use similar surveys targeted to consumers who are not customers and compare results. Differences between existing customer base and non-customers may expose new trends in consumer needs. Internal focus groups can be facilitated by marketing personnel. Select survey results, that had unexpected results or mixed feedback can be reviewed. Internal attendees should come from operations management and sales. External focus groups should be facilitated by a third-party vendor and held at independent sites. Discussions with customers should be compared with internal focus group results. Consumer focus groups should be facilitated by professional third-party firms. We have seen large companies lose their edge. IBM’ s fall as the leading technology firm in the 1990s is an excellent example, when Microsoft overtook them. Yet Google was able to take the lead away from Microsoft, particularly in relation to analytical consumer computing. And what about the comeback Apple made with its new array 256 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY of smart phone-related products? The question is, Why and how do these shifts in competitive advantage occur so quickly? Technology continues to generate change and that change is typically referred to today as a “ digital disruption.” The challenge in disruption is the inability to predict what consumers want and need; furthermore, the consumer may not know! The challenge, then, is for IT digital leaders to forecast the changes that are brought about by technology disruptions. So, digital transformation is more about predicting consumer behavior and providing new products and services, which we hope consumers will want. This is a significant challenge for IT leaders, of course, given that the profession was built on the notion that good specifications accurately depicted what users want. Langer (1997) originally defined this as the “ Concept of the Logical Equivalent.” So, we may have created an oxymoron— how do we develop systems that the user cannot specify? Furthermore, requirements that depict consumer behavior are now further complicated by the globalization of business. Which consumer behavior are we attempting to satisfy and across what societal cultural norms? The reality is that new software applications will need to be built with some uncertainty. That is, some business rules may be vague and risks will need to be part of the process of system functionality. To see an example of designing systems based on uncertainty, we need only to analyze the evolution of the electronic spreadsheet. The first electronic spreadsheet, called VisiCalc, was introduced by a company called VisiCorp. It was designed for the Apple II and eventually the IBM personal computer. The electronic spreadsheet was not designed based on consumer input per se, rather on perceived needs by visionary designers who saw a need for a generic calculator and mathematical worksheet. VisiCorp took a risk by offering a product to the market that consumers would find useful. Of course, history shows that it was a very good risk. The electronic spreadsheet, which is now dominated by Microsoft’ s Excel product has gone through multiple product generations. The inventors of the electronic spreadsheet had a vision and the market responded favorably. Although VisiCorp’ s vision of the market need was correct, the first version was hardly 100% accurate of what consumers would want in a spreadsheet. For example, additional features, such D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 257 as a database interface, three-dimensional spreadsheets to support budgeting and forward referencing, are all examples of responses from consumers that resulted in new product enhancements. Allen and Morton (1994) established an excellent graphic depiction of the relationship between technology advancements and market needs (Figure 10.2) Figure 10.2 shows an interesting life cycle of how product innovations relate to the creation of new products and services. The diagram reflects that innovations can occur as a result of new technology capabilities or inventions that establish new markets—like the electronic spreadsheet. On the other hand, the market can demand more features and f­ unctions the technology organizations or developers need to respond to that—like the upgrades made over the years to spreadsheet applications. Responding to market needs are what most organizations have practiced over the past 60 years, usually working with their end user populations (those internal users that supported the actual consumer). The digital revolution; however, is placing more emphasis on “generic” applications that resemble the object paradigm (one that requires applications to be able to fit into any business application). This trend will drive new and more advanced objectdriven applications. These applications will reside in a more robust object functioning library that can dynamically link these modules together to form specific applications that can support ­mul ­consumer devices (what is now being called the “Internet of Things”). Another useful approach to dealing with consumer preferences is Porter’ s Five Forces Framework. Porter’s framework consists of the following five components: 1. Competitors : What is the number of competitors in the market and what is the organization’ s position within the market? Technology Innovation Market Figure 10.2 Technology, innovation, and market needs. 258 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY 2. New entrants : What companies can come into the organization’ s space and provide competition? 3. Substitutes: What products or services can replace what you do? 4. Buyers : What alternatives do buyers have? How close and tight is the relationship between the buyer and seller? 5. Suppliers : What is the number of suppliers that are available, which can affect the relationship with the buyer and also determine price levels? Porter’ s framework is graphically depicted in Figure 10.3. Cadle et al. (2014) provide an approach to using Porter’ s model as part of the analysis and design process. Their approach is integrated with Langer’ s Analysis Consumer Methods in Table 10.2. Concepts of the S-Curve and Digital Transformation Analysis and Design Digital transformation will also be associated with the behavior of the S-curve. The S-curve has been a long-standing economic graph that depicts the life cycle of a product or service. The S-curve is shown in Figure 10.4 New entrants Consumer support dept. Suppliers Industry competitors (sales and marketing) Substitutes New products or services Figure 10.3 Porter’ s Five Forces Framework. Sales and marketing Buyers D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 259 Table 10.2 Langer’ s Analysis Consumer Methods PORTER’ S FIVE FORCES Industry competitors New entrants Suppliers Buyers Substitutes CADEL ET AL’ S APPROACH How strong is your market share? New threats Price sensitivity and closeness of relationship. Alternative choices and brand equity. Consumer alternatives LANGER’ S SOURCES OF INPUT Third-party market studies Third-party market studies Surveys and focus groups Consumer support and end user departments Sales/marketing team Surveys and focus groups Sales and marketing team Third‑party studies The left and lower portion of the S-curve represents a growing market opportunity that is likely volatile and exists where demand exceeds supply. As a result, the market opportunity is large and prices for the product are high. Thus, businesses should seek to capture as much of the market share at this time before competitors catch up. This requires the business to take more risk and assumes that the market will continue to demand the product. The shape of the S-curve suggests the life of this opportunity (the length of the x-axis represents the lifespan of the product). As the market approaches the middle of the center of the S-curve, demand begins to equal supply. Prices start to drop and the market, in general, becomes less volatile and more predictable. The drop in price reflects the presence of more competitors. As a product or service approaches the top of the S, supply begins to exceed demand. Prices begin to fall and the market is said to have reached maturity. The uniqueness of the product or service is now approaching commodity. Figure 10.4 The S-curve. 260 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY Figure 10.5 Extended S-curve. Typically, suppliers will attempt to produce new features and functions to extend the life of the curve as shown in Figure 10.5 Establishing a new S-curve, then, extends the competitive life of the product or service. Once the top of the S-curve is reached, the product or service has reached the commodity level, where supply is much greater than demand. Here, the product or service has likely reached the end of its useful competitive life and should either be replaced with a new solution or considered for outsourcing to a thirdparty who can deliver the product at a very low price. Langer’ s Driver/Supporter depicts the life cycle of any application or product as shown in Figure 10.6 Organizational Learning and the S-Curve When designing a new application or system, the status of that product’ s S-curve should be carefully correlated to the source of the Technology driver Mini loop technology enhancements Evaluation cycle Driver maturation Support status Economies of scale Replacement or outsource Figure 10.6 Langer’ s drive/supporter life cycle. D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 2 61 Table 10.3 S-Curve, Application Requirement Sources, and Risk S-CURVE STATUS Early S-curve High S-curve ANALYSIS INPUT SOURCE Consumer Consumer End users Crest of the S-curve End users Consumer End of S-curve End user RISK FACTOR High; market volatility and uncertainty. Lower; market is less uncertain as product becomes more mature. Medium; business users have experience with consumers and can provide reasonable requirements. Low; business users have more experience as product becomes mature. High; might consider new features and functions to keep product more competitive. Attempt to establish new S-curve. None; seek to replace product or consider third-party product to replace what is now a legacy application. Also think of outsourcing application. requirements. Table 10.3 reflects the corresponding market sources and associated risk factors relating to the dependability of requirements based on the state of the consumer’ s market. Leaders engaged in this process obviously need to have an abstract perspective to support a visionary and risk-oriented strategy. Table 10.3 includes the associated complexity of staff needed to deal with each period in the S-curve. Communities of Practice As stated in Chapter 4, Communities of Practice (COP) have been traditionally used as a method of bringing together people in organizations with similar talents, responsibilities and/or interests. Such communities can be effectively used to obtain valuable information about the way things work and what is required to run business operations. Getting such information strongly correlates to the challenges of obtaining dependable information from the consumer market. I discussed the use of surveys and focus groups earlier in this chapter, but COP is an alternative approach to bringing together similar types of consumers grouped by their interests and needs. In digital transformation we find yet another means of obtaining requirements by engaging in, and contributing to, the practices of specific consumer communities. This means that working with COP offers another way of developing relations with consumers to better understand their needs. Using this 262 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY approach inside an organization, as we saw in Chapter 4, provides a means of better learning about issues by using a sustained method of remaining interconnected with specific business user groups, which can define what the organization really knows and contributes to the business that is typically not documented. IT digital leaders need to become engaged in learning if they are to truly understand what is needed to develop more effective and accurate software applications. It seems logical that COP can provide the mechanism to assist IT digital leaders with an understanding of how business users and consumers behave and interact. Indeed, the analyst can target the behavior of the community and its need to consider what new organizational structures can better support emerging technologies. I have, in many ways, already established and presented what should be called the “community of IT digital leaders” and its need to understand how to restructure, in order to meet the needs of the digital economy. This new era does not lend itself to the traditional approaches to IT strategy, but rather to a more risk-based process that can deal with the realignment of business operations integrated with different consumer relationships. The relationship, then, between COP and digital transformation is significant, given that future IT applications will heavily rely on informal inputs. While there may be attempts to computerize knowledge using predictive analytics software and big data, it will not be able to provide all of the risk-associated behaviors of users and consumers. That is, a “ structured” approach to creating predictive behavior reporting, is typically difficult to establish and maintain. Ultimately, the dynamism from digital transformations creates too many uncertainties to be handled by sophisticated automated applications on how organizations will react to digital change variables. So, COP, along with these predictive analytics applications, provides a more thorough umbrella of how to deal with the ongoing and unpredictable interactions established by emerging digital technologies. The IT Leader in the Digital Transformation Era When we discuss the digital world and its multitude of effects on how business is conducted, one must ask how this impacts the profession of IT Leader. This section attempts to address the perceived evolution of the role. D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 263 1. The IT leader must become more innovative. While the business has the problem of keeping up with changes in their markets, IT needs to provide more solutions. Many of these solutions will not be absolute and likely will have short shelf lives. Risk is fundamental. As a result, IT leaders must truly become “ business” leaders by exploring new ideas from the outside and continually considering how to implement the needs of the company’ s consumers. As a result, the business analyst will emerge as an idea broker (Robertson & Robertson, 2012) by constantly pursuing external ideas and transforming them into automated and competitive solutions. These ideas will have a failure rate, which means that companies will need to produce more applications than they will inevitably implement. This will certainly require organizations to spend more on software development. 2. Quality requirements will be even more complex. In order to keep in equilibrium with the S-curve the balance between quality and production will be a constant negotiation. Because applications will have shorter life cycles and there is pressure to provide competitive solutions, products will need to sense market needs and respond to them quicker. As a result, fixes and enhancements to applications will become more inherent in the development cycle after products go live in the market. Thus, the object paradigm will become even more fundamental to better software development because it provides more readily tested reusable applications and routines. 3. Dynamic interaction among users and business teams will require the creation of multiple layers of communities of practice. Organizations involved in this dynamic process must have autonomy and purpose (Narayan, 2015). 4. Application analysis, design, and development must be treated and managed as a living process; that is, it never ends until the product is obsolete (supporter end). So, products must continually develop to maturity. 5. Organizations should never outsource a driver technology until it reaches supporter status. 264 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY How Technology Disrupts Firms and Industries The world economy is transforming rapidly from an analogue to a digital-based technology-driven society. This transformation requires businesses to move from a transactional relationship to one that that is “ interactional” (Ernst & Young, 2012). However, this analogue to digital transformation, while essential for a business to survive in the twenty-first century, is difficult to accomplish. Langer’ s (2011) theory of responsive organizational dynamism (ROD), as discussed earlier in this book, is modified to show that successful adaptation of new digital technologies called Digital Dynamisms requires cultural assimilation of the people that comprise the organization. Dynamism and Digital Disruption The effects of digital dynamism can also be defined as a form of disruption or what is now being referred to as digital disruption . Specifically, the big question facing many enterprises is around how they can anticipate the unexpected threats brought on by technological advances that can devastate their business. There are typically two disruption factors: 1. A new approach to providing products and services to the consumer. 2. A strategy not previously feasible, now made possible using new technological capabilities. Indeed, disruption occurs when a new approach meets the right conditions. Because technology shortens the time it takes to reach consumers, the changes are occurring at an accelerated and exponential pace. As an example, the table below shows the significant acceleration of the time it takes to reach 50 million consumers: Radio Television Internet Facebook Twitter Instagram Poké mon GO 38 years 13 years 4 years 3.5 years 9 months 6 months 19 days D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 265 The speed of which we can accelerate change has an inverse effect on the length of time the effect lasts. We use the S-curve to show how digital disruption shortens the competitive life of new products and services. Figure 10.7 represents how the S-curve is shrinking along the x-axis, which measures the length or time period of the product/ service life. Figure 10.7 essentially reflects that the life of a product or service is shrinking, thus enterprises have less time to capture a market opportunity and far less time to enjoy the length of its competitive success. As a result, business leaders are facing a world that is changing at an accelerating rate and trying to cope with understanding how new waves of “ disruptive” technologies will affect their business. Ultimately, digital disruption shifts the way competitive forces deliver services, requires change in the way operations are managed and measured, and shortens the life of any given product or service success. Critical Components of “ Digital” Organization A study conducted by Westerman et al. (2014), who interviewed 157 executives in fifty large companies, found four capabilities that were key to successful digital transformation: 1. A unified digital platform : Integration of the organization’ s data and processes across its department silos is critical. One reason why web-based companies gain advantage over traditional competitors is their ability to use analytics and customer personalization from central and integrated sources. Thus, the first step toward a successful digital transformation is for companies to invest in establishing central repositories of data and common applications that can access the information. Figure 10.7 The shrinking S-curve. 266 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY This centralization of digital data is key to competing globally since firms must be able to move data to multiple locations and use that data in different contexts. 2. Solution delivery : Many traditional IT departments are not geared to integrating new processes into their legacy operations. A number of firms have addressed this problem by establishing independent “ innovation centers” designed to initiate new digital ideas that are more customer solution oriented. These centers typically focus on how new mobile and social media technologies can be launched without disturbing the core technology systems that support the enterprise. Some of these initiatives include partnerships with high-tech vendors; however, a number of executives have shown concern that such alliances might result in dependencies because of the lack of knowledge inside the organization. 3. Analytics capabilities : Companies need to ensure that their data can be used for predictive analytics purposes. Predictive analytics provide actors with a better understanding of their consumer’ s behaviors and allow them to formulate competitive strategies over their competitors. Companies that integrate data better from their transactional systems can make more “ informed and better decisions” and formulate strategies to take advantage of customer preferences and thus, turn them into business opportunities. An example is an insurance company initiative that concentrates on products that meet customer trends determined by examining their historical transactions across various divisions of the business. Analytics also helps organizations to develop risk models that can assist them to formulate accurate portfolios. 4. Business and IT integration : While the integration of the IT department with the business has been discussed for decades, few companies have achieved a desired outcome (Langer, 2016). The need for digital transformation has now made this integration essential for success and to avoid becoming a victim of disruption. True IT and business integration means more than just combining processes and decision making; but rather, the actual movement of personnel into business units so they can be culturally assimilated (Langer & Yorks, 2013). D I GITA L TR A NSF ORM ATI ON 267 Assimilating Digital Technology Operationally and Culturally When considering how to design an organization structure that can implement digital technologies, firms must concentrate on how to culturally assimilate a new architecture. The importance of the architecture first affects the strategic integration component of ROD. Indeed, the actor-oriented architecture must be designed to be agile enough to react to increased changes in market demands. The consumerization of technology, defined as changes in technology brought on by increased consumer knowledge of how digital assets can reduce costs and increase competitive advantage, have created a continual reduction in the length of any new competitive products or services life. Thus, consumerization has increased what Eisenhardt and Bourgeouse (1988) define as “ high-velocity” market conditions. This dilemma drives the challenge of how organizations will cope to avoid the negative effects of digital disruption. There are four overall components that appear to be critical factors of autonomy from disruption: 1. Companies must recognize that speed and comfort of service can be more important than just the cost: our experience is that enterprises who offer multiple choices that allow consumers to choose from varying levels of service options are more competitive. The more personal the service option, the higher the cost. Examples can be seen in the airline industry where passengers have options for better seats at a higher price, or a new option being offered by entertainment parks that now provide less wait time on shorter lines, for higher paying customers. These two examples match the price with a desired service and firms that do not offer creative pricing options are prime for disruption. 2. Empower your workforce to try new ideas without over controls. Companies are finding that many young employees have new service ideas but are blocked from trying them because of the “ old guard” in their management reporting lines. Line managers need to be educated on how to allow their staffs to quickly enact new processes, even though some of them may not be effective. 268 IN F ORM ATI ON TEC HNOLO GY 3. Allow employees and customer to have choice of devices. Traditionally IT departments desire to create environments where employees adhere to standard hardware and software structures. Indeed, standard structures make it easier for IT to support internal users and provide better security across systems. However, as technology has evolved, the relation between hardware and software, especially in mobile devices, has become more specialized. For example, Apple smartphones have proprietary hardware architectures that in many cases require different versions of application software as well as different security considerations than its major competitor, Samsung. With the consumerization of technology, these IT departments must now support multiple devices because both their customers and employees are free to select them. Therefore, it is important to allow staff to freely integrate company applications with their personal device choices. 4. Similar to (3), organizations who force staff to adhere to strict processes and support structures are exposed to digital disruption. Organizational structures that rely on technological innovation must be able to integrate new digital opportunities seamlessly into their current production and support processes. Specifically, this means having the ability to be agile enough to provide services using different digital capabilities and from different geographical locations. Conclusion This chapter has provided a number of different and complex aspects of digital transformation, its effects on how organizations are structured and how they need to compete to survive in the future. The technology executive is, by default, the key person to lead these digital transformation initiatives because of the technical requirements that are at the center of successfully completing these projects. As such, these executives must also focus on their own transformation as leaders that allows them to help form the strategic goals to meet the dynamic changes in consumer behavior.
Purchase answer to see full attachment