How to Turn Webinars Into Your Best Lead Gen Channel in 5 Phases via @sejournal, @hethr_campbell

A few weeks ago, we sat down with marketers running webinar programs at agencies and in-house teams, all B2B. We asked them what was working, what wasn’t, and where they felt stuck.

Three pain points came up in nearly every conversation:

“Webinars are a heavy lift with little proven ROI.”
“We’re not generating enough qualified leads.”
“Without clear attribution, leadership isn’t seeing the value of webinars.”

If you’ve said any version of those things, you’re not alone, and you’re not the problem. The system around it is.

Topic selection, promotion, follow-up, and measurement are where the pipeline leaks.

And those gaps are what we covered live last week in our 60-minute tell-all webinar. We showed attendees how to make webinars their best performing lead gen channel.

Here’s the system we use to run 50+ webinars a year on a 3-person team.

The 5 Phases Of A Webinar That Converts

  1. Attract The Right ICP: topic, speaker, title.
  2. Make Setup Easy: platform and landing page.
  3. Content That Qualifies: copy, promotion, emails, handouts.
  4. Going Live: generating pipeline signals.
  5. Follow-up & Convert: segment, repurpose, measure.

Here are a few of the bigger takeaways from each phase. Watch on demand for the nuances to help you drive more qualified leads on your next webinar.

It’s worth the watch, as one live attendee pointed out: Great information, I had several takeaways as we did our first webinar on Tuesday. Thanks!

Here’s what she learned.

How To Choose Your Webinar Topic Based On Business Needs, Not Just A Fun Idea

Before any of the tactics matter, get clear on how the webinar can support business objectives. Who is the target audience that best fills that business objective? Then, finally, what does that target audience need before they can convert?

Start by asking yourself:

  • Are you driving net new pipeline to showcase your brand as a thought leader?
  • Building credibility for a new product line, or warming an account list for sales?

We share a few more webinar topic identification questions in the on-demand webinar, so be sure to check that out.

But, as you can begin to see, each goal points to a different topic, a different speaker, a different promo plan, and a different follow-up.

The key is to stop picking topics based on what you want to talk about (and this includes leadership).

5 Tools That Identify High-Conversion Topic Gaps For Webinars

The best marketing strategies are built on data, not just excitement.

  1. Sales Team
  2. CRM (Learn the key events to track.)
  3. Google Analytics 4 (We have a GA4 exploration report for webinar ideation.)
  4. Transcripts (Process and isolate common pain points with AI)
  5. Interviews (AI can isolate common pain points.)

So, your first stop is to go to your sales team, if you have one, and ask one question: “What’s the number one thing prospects are struggling with right now?”

You’ll get your next three webinar topics from that conversation.

If you don’t have a sales team, we share 4 ways to use data to pick your webinar topic during our session.

Now that we have the personalized webinar topic, we can proceed with the rest of the webinar creation process.

Phase 1: Choose A Formulated Title That Specifically Attracts Your Target Audience

The title is your first impression and it is the most impactful for driving the right ICPs, the ones you and sales agreed on.

A great webinar title tells the reader you understand their pain, and what they can expect from giving you their time.

For context, one interviewee let us know that 1 change to their webinar title doubled attendance.

Best Webinar Title Formulas

We also have 2 webinar title tests you can try to make sure your webinar title attracts leads:

Phase 2: How To Make Webinar Setup Easy

The teams that run profitable webinars at scale setup once, and refine as new tests prove successful. Utilize templates as much as you can.

From templating the platform set up, to emails and landing page copy, and duplicating nurture sequences, this is where you can ease your time to market, and the load on the team.

In that setup, look for our recommended webinar platform functionalities:

  • Breakout rooms for high-intent conversations.
  • Polls and Q&A that help qualify leads during the presentation.
  • CRM integration so engagement data flows automatically.
  • 1 way to keep key audiences engaged.
  • 5 ways to extend your reach and gain more potential pipeline.

The most impactful element to template is a conversion-optimized landing page that really speaks to their pain.

Your webinar landing page should do three things: hook them with the title, build trust with the speaker and the outcome / benefit they’re going to get, and make registering feel like the obvious next step. Every element on that page should earn its spot.

See how we’ve optimized our webinar landing pages.

Phase 3: How To Create & Distribute Content That Qualifies

This phase is where content for promotion gets created, which is simultaneously where lead quality gets decided.

Most webinar programs frame promotion as a seat-filling exercise, but the real job is filtering for intent.

The wrong title and channel mix pulls a wide audience with no buying signal. The right ones bring the ICPs your sales team actually wants to talk to.

That comes down to three leverage points:

  • a promo cadence built on relevance instead of frequency,
  • a multi-channel mix that doesn’t lean entirely on email,
  • messaging that mirrors your target audience’s language to attract the right lead in the first place.

Get those right and your webinar program will stop chasing volume and start producing pipeline.

Phase 4: What To Do When Going Live To Warm Your Target Audience

This is what you planned for, and this is where most presenters need coached to teach, not pitch. B2B buyers convert on trust and this is your time to show your expertise and thought leadership.

Your webinar should mirror their pain (based on that research you did earlier) and walk them through actionable takeaways. Sell thru education, focus on their needs, tell them how to do something, and then show why they need your solution.

The live hour isn’t just content delivery. It’s where intent shows up.

Every poll response, every Q&A entry, every breakout room opt-in is behavioral data your sales team can act on, often more reliable than a form-fill or a download.

Done right, the live hour produces a list of high-intent leads sales is already eager to chase.

Phase 5: How To Follow-Up After A Webinar & Convert Attendees

First, consider the 5% Rule.

Reach out to them immediately.

The other 95% aren’t ready to buy. Stop selling to them. Push value, share the takeaways, send a related framework. When they move into market, you’re the brand they already trust.

If you treat both groups the same, you lose both.

How To Measure What Leadership Cares About

If your CMO thinks webinars are a “nice to have,” it’s almost never a webinar problem. It’s a measurement problem.

Stop reporting on registrations, attendance rates, and recording views. Start reporting on breakout room opt-ins, MQL conversion rate, pipeline influence in dollars, and closed-won deals tied to webinar engagement.

When you put the right stats in front of leadership, webinars stop being a line item and start being a revenue channel.

Watch the Full Webinar Session

The recording goes deeper on each phase, includes the live polls and audience Q&A, and walks through how we built and promoted this exact webinar as a worked example.

Build Your Next Webinar With Us – Cohort Starts May 11

Reading about a system is not the same as running one. Our four-week cohort fixes that.

You’ll work through all five phases with us, from topic selection, landing page, promo plan, live execution, through follow-up. You leave with a shipped webinar that drives real attendee registrations, and a repeatable playbook for the next one.

Seats are limited to 20 so we can give every team direct feedback.

Reserve your seat. Cohort starts May 11 →

The Download: DeepSeek’s latest AI breakthrough, and the race to build world models

This is today’s edition of The Download, our weekday newsletter that provides a daily dose of what’s going on in the world of technology.

Three reasons why DeepSeek’s new model matters

On Friday, Chinese AI firm DeepSeek released a preview of V4, its long-awaited new flagship model. Notably, the model can process much longer prompts than its last generation, thanks to a new design that handles large amounts of text more efficiently.

While the model remains open source, its performance matches leading closed-source rivals from Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google. It is also DeepSeek’s first release optimized Huawei’s Ascend chips—a key test of China’s dependence on Nvidia.

Here are three ways V4 could shake up AI.

—Caiwei Chen

The rise of world models

AI systems have already gained impressive mastery over the digital world, but the physical world remains humanity’s domain. As it turns out, building an AI that composes novels or code apps is far easier than developing one to fold laundry or navigate city streets. To bridge this gap, many researchers believe you need something called a world model.

Proponents like Stanford professor Fei-Fei Li and AMI Labs founder Yann LeCun argue these models can overcome the well-known limitations of LLMs—and realize AI’s promise for robotics. Find out why they’ve brought world models to the forefront of the field.

—Grace Huckins

World models are on our list of the 10 Things That Matter in AI Right Now, our essential guide to what’s really worth your attention in the field.

Subscribers can watch an exclusive roundtable unveiling the technologies and trends on the list, with analysis from MIT Technology Review’s AI reporter Grace Huckins and executive editors Amy Nordrum and Niall Firth.

The must-reads

I’ve combed the internet to find you today’s most fun/important/scary/fascinating stories about technology.

1 China has blocked Meta’s $2 billion acquisition of AI startup Manus
Regulators cited national security grounds. (WSJ $)
+ Beijing called the deal a “conspiratorial” attempt to hollow out its tech base. (FT $)
+ The country is tightening its grip on AI firms that try to leave. (TechCrunch)
+ The decision escalates China’s AI rivalry with the US. (Bloomberg $)
+ But there will be no winners in their competition. (MIT Technology Review)

2 Google is investing up to $40 billion in Anthropic
In a deal valuing the AI firm at $350 billion. (CNBC)
+ The funding will support the firm’s growing computing needs. (TechCrunch)
+ Anthropic and OpenAI are fighting for compute capacity. (Axios)

3 President Trump just fired the entire National Science Board
The NSF has played a crucial role in developing technology. (The Verge)
+ The move heightens fears over political interference in US science. (Nature)

4 Conspiracy theories about the Washington shooting are proliferating online
Over 300,000 posts appeared on X using the keyword “staged.” (NYT $)
+ The theories are also swirling on Bluesky and Instagram. (Wired)

5 The AI compute crunch is starting to hit the broader economy.
It’s affecting jobs, gadgets, and electricity prices. (404 Media)
+ The AI compute explosion is the tech story of our time. (MIT Technology Review)

6 Elon Musk says a new banking tool brings X close to a “super app”
He’s pledged to launch the tool this month. (Bloomberg)

7 AI optimism is surging across Asia while US sentiment cools
The divide could shape where adoption happens fastest. (Rest of World)

8 Apple is tying its new CEO’s ascent to its first foldable iPhone
It wants to build the buzz around John Ternus. (Gizmodo

9 Twelve firms are developing the Golden Dome’s space-based interceptors
They’ve won contracts worth up to $3.2 billion. (Ars Technica)

10 NASA has shared promising results from Artemis II
The spacecraft and rocket fared well. (Engadget)

Quote of the day

“Getting out the truth and establishing facts and reliable information takes time. But our audiences really don’t have that kind of patience.”

—Amanda Crawford, associate professor at the University of Connecticut, tells the NYT why conspiracy theories are gaining traction online.

One More Thing

MIRIAM MARTINCIC


Welcome to Kenya’s Great Carbon Valley: a bold new gamble to fight climate change

Kenya’s Great Rift Valley is home to five geothermal power stations, which harness clouds of steam to generate about a quarter of the country’s electricity. But some of the energy escapes into the atmosphere, while even more remains underground for lack of demand. That’s what brought Octavia Carbon here.

Last year, the startup began harnessing some of that excess energy to remove CO2 from the air. The company says the method is efficient, affordable, and—crucially—scalable. But the project also faces fierce opposition. 

Read the full story on the future of Kenya’s “Great Carbon Valley.”


—Diana Kruzman

We can still have nice things

A place for comfort, fun and distraction to brighten up your day. (Got any ideas? Drop me a line.)

+ Fred Again’s Tiny Desk Concert is a masterclass in intimate performance.
+ Here’s a delightful look at how we’re all linked through geography and shared heritage.
+ Take a short, peaceful break to watch Tokyo’s cherry blossoms from a bird’s eye view.
+ There’s something oddly satisfying about watching an industrial shredder turn everyday items into confetti.

Rebuilding the data stack for AI

Artificial intelligence may be dominating boardroom agendas, but many enterprises are discovering that the biggest obstacle to meaningful adoption is the state of their data. While consumer-facing AI tools have dazzled users with speed and ease, enterprise leaders are discovering that deploying AI at scale requires something far less glamorous but far more consequential: data infrastructure that is unified, governed, and fit for purpose.

That gap between AI ambition and enterprise readiness is becoming one of the defining challenges of this next phase of digital transformation. As Bavesh Patel, senior vice president of Databricks, puts it, “the quality of that AI and how effective that AI is, is really dependent on information in your organization.” Yet in many companies, that information remains fragmented across legacy systems, siloed applications, and disconnected formats, making it nearly impossible for AI systems to generate trustworthy, context-rich outputs.

“Really, the big competitive differentiator for most organizations is their own data and then their third-party data that they can add to it,” says Patel.

For enterprise AI to deliver value, data must be consolidated into open formats, governed with precision, and made accessible across functions. Without that foundation, businesses risk “terrible AI,” as Patel bluntly describes it. That means moving beyond siloed SaaS platforms and disconnected dashboards toward a unified, open data architecture capable of combining structured and unstructured data, preserving real-time context, and enforcing rigorous access controls. When the groundwork is laid correctly, organizations can move toward measurable outcomes, unlocking efficiencies, automating complex workflows, and even launching entirely new lines of business.

That value focus is critical, says Rajan Padmanabhan, unit technology officer at Infosys, especially as enterprises seek precision in the outputs driving business decisions. Rather than treating AI initiatives as isolated innovation projects, leading companies are tying AI deployment directly to business metrics, using governance frameworks to determine what delivers results and what should be abandoned quickly.

“We see this big opportunity just with AI literacy with business users, where they’re very eager to understand how they should be thinking about AI,” adds Patel. “What does AI mean when you peel the covers? What are the pieces and the building blocks that you need to put in place, both from a technology and a training and an enablement standpoint?”

The possibilities ahead are substantial. As AI agents evolve from copilots into autonomous operators capable of managing workflows and transactions, the organizations that win will be those that build the right foundation now.

“What we are seeing as a new way of thinking is moving from a system of execution or a system of engagement to a system of action,” notes  Padmanabhan. “That is the new way we see the road ahead.”

The future of AI in the enterprise will be determined by whether businesses can turn fragmented information into a strategic asset capable of powering both smarter decisions and entirely new ways of operating.

This episode of Business Lab is produced in partnership with Infosys Topaz.

Full Transcript:

Megan Tatum: From MIT Technology Review, I’m Megan Tatum, and this is Business Lab, the show that helps business leaders make sense of new technologies coming out of the lab and into the marketplace.

This episode is produced in partnership with Infosys Topaz.

Now, recent advancements in AI may have unlocked some compelling new industrial applications, but a reliance on inadequate data models means that many enterprises are hitting a brick wall. AI and agentic AI in particular place a whole new set of demands on data. The technology requires greater access, context, and guardrails to operate effectively. Existing data models often fall short. They’re too fragmented or siloed. Data itself often lacks quality. To bridge the gap, they require an AI-ready upgrade.

Two words for you: data reconfigured.

My guest today, are Bavesh Patel, senior vice president for Go-to-Market at Databricks, and Rajan Padmanabhan, unit technology officer for data analytics and AI at Infosys.

Welcome, Bavesh and Rajan.

Rajan Padmanabhan: Thank you. Thanks for having us.

Bavesh Patel: Thanks for having us.

Megan: Fantastic. Thank you both so much for joining us today. Bavesh, if I could come to you first, when we talk about AI-ready data, what exactly do we mean? What new demands does AI place on data, and how does this impact the way it needs to be structured and used?

Bavesh: Yeah. Great question. Appreciate you hosting us today. I think that obviously the whole world is enamored with AI because of all of the power that we can all see as users. AI is now democratized across hundreds of millions of users. And when we think about enterprises and businesses using AI, the quality of that AI and how effective that AI is really dependent on information in your organization, and that’s data. And what we found is that most enterprises, their data is kind of locked away in these different applications and different systems. And it’s very difficult to get a good view of, what is all my data? How trustworthy is it? How recent and fresh is it? And all of that is being injected into the AI. Unless you have a proper understanding of your data, the ability to ensure that it’s data that’s accurate and that can be used so that the AI can take advantage of it, you’re actually going to end up having terrible AI.

We see a lot of customers spend time on cleansing their data, organizing their data, making sure it’s access controlled correctly, and that tends to be the fuel of good AI.

Megan: Yeah. It’s such a foundational thing, isn’t it? But it can be missed, I think, quite easily. Rajan, what difference can having AI-ready data really make for enterprises as they unlock that full potential of AI and its applications?

Rajan: First and foremost, thanks for having us. It’s a pleasure. I think in continuation of what Bavesh talked about, see, data and AI is pretty synonymous. And similarly, the consumer AI and enterprise AI and enterprise agentic AI are different because first and foremost, the business needs to have the context. That context from your enterprise information, which is not only structured, both structured and unstructured and user-generated contents and all forms of data is going to be very, very critical to really get the context right, and really get any model that you pick. That’s where the platforms like Databricks really help with the plethora of models or whether you want to build your own models or whether you want to ground the model based on your data. That is going to be very, very critical. That is where getting the data for AI is going to be very, very critical.

The third critical part, and this actually will be one of the roadblocks for adoption of AI. That’s why if you see the AI adoption on the consumer side is skyrocketing, but on the enterprise side, the enterprises are struggling is primarily around the precision of their output, because you are taking a business decisions where you are taking a buy decision, you are taking a sell decision, or you are trying to recommend something, recommend the content. It could be 20 different use cases. For that, the precision is going to be very critical. We are seeing our customers, the successful customers, definitely for the precision to be more than 92% is not aspiration, that is a must-have. If you have that, definitely being that AI data is going to be the entrepreneur right now for that.

Megan: And I suppose if we’ve outlined there how critical this is, where should enterprises start then, professional perhaps, the level, what are the foundations when it comes to building an AI-ready data model?

Bavesh: Yeah. And I think Rajan hit the nail on the head. I mean, enterprises are grappling with a different set of problems than consumer AI. The first thing is that you’ve got to get a handle on your data. As I mentioned, a lot of the data is locked in. Ensuring that you have ability to put your data in a place where you can understand the holistic view of as much of your data as possible. That kind of starts with putting your data in open formats. A lot of the valuable data today in an organization is locked away in some proprietary SaaS app or some system, and all the datasets aren’t connected together to form that context. The first step is to really do an analysis of what is your data estate? What are the critical pieces of data that need to be put into a place where you can start to understand them and how they’re connected to one another?

Thinking about how do you set up your data catalog, thinking about how do the relationships between the data assets work, putting data governance around it, that seems to be the first step. And if you think about how ChatGPT was built, it took all the data on the internet and then aggregated it, synthesized it, and then built these transformer models, while enterprises, they don’t really have a handle of all their data within the organization. That’s the first foundation that you really want to think about. The second thing is that you don’t want to just go ad hoc, go and do random AI projects. You really need to be thinking about business value. A lot of our customers are looking at AI much more strategically in that they want to be able to get projects on the board with wins and then generate business value.

Building an AI value roadmap, which is connected to how well your data is organized, those two things seem to be foundational to how do you launch AI successfully in your organization.

Megan: That value piece is so important, isn’t it? And as I understand it, Infosys and Databricks have worked closely together to guide organizations through this transformation. I wondered, can you share some examples of the impact you’ve seen enterprises you’ve worked with, Rajan, what difference has it made to the ways in which they can integrate more sophisticated AI and agentic AI applications?

Rajan: Well, that’s a very, very good question. What both Databricks and Infosys has done is we have come up with, a kind of a framework first. First and foremost, it all needs to start with the value. One of the largest food products company where we collaborated together, what we have done is we have applied this framework. The framework consists of six different things. First and foremost, very critical is the value management, which Bavesh touched upon. We have worked together to come up with a 3M measurement framework, what we call adaptability, business value, and then responsible. You can’t just go and do a garage project. It has to be measurable. It should be responsible, follow all those things. That is going to be very critical. And we helped this client to prioritize, which will give them the most value for money, the investments that they are making.

The second critical part here is it is not like most of the enterprises today are not everybody’s AI-born companies. Most of them were born during analog days; most of them were born in digital days. There are companies which are applying AI for modernization, because a lot of your historical information, which is actually helping you to build that long-term context. And that is where we have worked closely with some of the native tools of Databricks, like Lakebridge or the AI assistants that are there, and then create composable services on top of it to help the clients unlock the value bringing into Databricks. And then the second part where we help the client is exactly to the point, the readying of data. Now you brought in the data, now you have to bring both the structured, unstructured, analytical and all these aspects.

And that is where the third layer, we closely work with the Databricks, which is part of leveraging all the great capabilities within the Databricks, be it Unity Catalog, be it the open formats, or be it the gateways and other aspects. We were able to make the data available for this client. What has really helped our client, the third part, is Agent Bricks, which is one of the differentiatiors. It gives you the flavor for the enterprise. That is where we have closely worked, and we built some of our industry-specific agents, be it CPG, be it energy, be it FS. And for this client, what we have done is we have taken some of those CPG-specific use cases. Either it could be on the HR space or the procurement space or on the marketing space. And this has really helped our client be able to build a business capability surrounding this and unlock eight to nine use cases, we call it as a products, agentic AI products, which can really drive more value for them, solving the real business problems.

And this kind of a comprehensive set of frameworks plus set of suites of services, plus our solution assets, Infosys solution assets, as well asunlocking the value from Databricks has really helped these clients. And we see similar patents for a lot of these successful engagements where we were able to continuously drive the value by applying this framework actually.

Megan: Right. Sounds like it made a real material difference. Rajan mentioned a few of the tools in Databricks catalog there, Bavesh. I know you’ve recently worked to launch an operational database for AI agents and apps. I wonder how does a platform like that help organizations in this journey? What makes it different from some of the other platforms out there right now?

Bavesh: Databricks has come to market with a new offering called Lakebase, which is really an OLTP database where you can build your AI apps. And if you think about it, there’s really two main types of data in an enterprise. There’s all the historical data, which is all the things that have happened, and that’s really what your analytics is based on. You have an old app system where you have put all your historical data and Databricks has come to market with what we call the Lakehouse, which is essentially a data warehouse with all of your data that is not operational in nature. It’s historical data. And I think that Lakehouse concept is really pushing forward with AI because a lot of our customers have thousands of users within their business and they need to get data. And what they’ve done is they’ve actually gone down the BI route, which is really building a dashboard or a report.

Most organizations have had thousands of these dashboards and reports proliferate across the organization and then they need to be customized. It just takes a long time for users inside of the business to actually get access to the data. AI now is really making that a lot easier from just the analytics perspective where we can now democratize access to the data, which has really been the holy grail for most data teams. They really want to get out of the way and just give the right data to the right people inside of the business with the right access.

With a product like Genie at Databricks, you can just use English language or whatever your language is to ask questions of the data. And it’ll give you back data that answers your questions in context. It’ll give you not just what ChatGPT will give you, which is information about a topic that’s on the internet, but it will actually tell you, “Well, why did my sales numbers not reflect what I expected in the month of April?”

It’ll give you some root cause analysis based on your enterprise data. Genie is going to be one of these things that’s really important where it’s going to truly kind of democratize data inside of the business. That’s kind of this OLAP world, which is what the Lakehouse is. More recently, we’ve come to market with what we call the Lakebase, which is the OLTP world. What we’re finding is that agents are now being deployed in these organizations, and those agents need a place to keep all of their orchestration, all of the context of what’s happening in that particular workflow. On the one hand, you’ve got users just asking questions. On the other hand, the next chapter is going to be around automating an entire business process. If you’re taking a function like generating a campaign in marketing, right? There are a lot of tools you use and a lot of steps you use.

An agent can come in and really automate a lot of that. But on the back end of that agent, you’re going to need to stand up a real-time database to keep track of all the things that the agent is doing. That’s what Databricks has brought to market, which is this OLTP Lakebase solution. The innovation that we have brought to market is that it’s a modern kind of Postgres database where we have separated the compute and storage, very much like what we did with the data Lakehouse with the data warehouse. But on the Lakebase, the data is on one copy inside of your cloud storage, and then the compute is separated and it’s serverless. You can do things like branching and you can start up the OLTP database really quickly. What we found is that agents are actually starting these Lakebases because they can very quickly go start one up, keep it running, put it down when it needs to, make a copy of it.

Agents are doing this, then they need the velocity, they need a cost-effective solution. And the beauty of all this is when you take the OLTP, which is all around the Lakebase and the real time, and you take the OLAP, you now have one system for all your data. You don’t have to copy the data around, you don’t have to manage all the permissions, you can set the context against it. We see these AI apps being really the future of how businesses run, where they’re going to take away all of the bottlenecks that humans are having to do repetitive work and automate these using LLMs and all these new technologies. We want to be the default for powering all that because we believe that our Lakebase technology is going to be faster, cheaper, and more secure for an AI database.

Megan: Sounds like a real game changer. And we’ve touched on this a couple of times already, I mean, this idea of value. We know that engaging the commercial value of investments into AI is really high on the priorities right now for senior leaders. How important is this value measure piece when it comes to creating AI-ready data systems, Rajan? How can organizations ensure they’re monitoring what is delivering and what isn’t?

Rajan: This is the paramount importance and most of the successful AI implementations or agentic AI implementations really required this value measurement. I’ll just extend the client example that I talked about, the large food products company, the global products company, to explain this question. I just want to create a metaphor. When the initial digital world came, we have a lot of these analytics primarily around defining those performance management KPIs, fact-based decisioning and other things were evolving over a period of time. Typically, a lot of these metrics are going to be very critical for them to measure how a function, how a business is doing. On a similar line for the value measurement, if I take the same example of the client, what is very critical for an organization is actually to map your outcome that you are expecting.

Iin this case, how do I optimize my spend on direct and indirect purchases? So by applying AI, I would like to identify the areas where I can optimize the spend. That means one of the critical measures that you have is, what is your indirect expense classification and what spends you have been classified and how much you are able to reduce by bringing in this. Establishing these measures and the metrics is going to be very, very critical. And once you establish these base metrics and the measurement, and the beauty of it is some of these metrics, to just extend what Bavesh was talking about, the capabilities that Databricks gives you, like metrics view, features, tools, and other things would actually help you to translate those AI telemetries, business telemetries that is coming from your applications into a measurable metrics in terms of an outcome, which you can actually measure using the Genie room for value management measurement.

Then what happens is two things that you can take, the use case, the products that as I said for this client, the products that we build either on the procurement side or on the marketing research side, if you find there is a value either because of VAC, they identify that they’re able to optimize or it is able to reachability, what is the reach, you can either accelerate that use case and further fine tune that product to expand it. Or there are, if you find it is not really driving the value or I’m not able to see the value that it is going to deliver, you can very well do a fast failure method rather than trying to make it work, you can understand and then you can take a call to pivot it to something else different.

There are three aspects here. What we see from our experience, not only with this client across some of our other clients from industrial manufacturing or FS or in the energy, is by setting up this metrics-driven valuation method upfront and then leveraging the capabilities to establish, transform these telemetries, signals into a measurement, what we call an AI compass room so that you really measure the business stakeholders, whether it is coming from a marketing office or whether it is coming from supply chain office or whether it is coming from a CFO office where they can say, “Hey, this is what it is intended to do, this is what the current measurement, and this is where it’s failing that can help them to pivot.” And this will actually drive and democratize AI, all the agent decay across the enterprise, and that really drives the value.

This is going to be one of the critical part that enterprise needs to do it. And that is where the six part framework that I talked about, applying that framework like value office, applying the ready for AI, applying the transformation fabric. Then the third part is the governance, which is going to be the entrepreneur of this. Then running your operations, not based on SLA, based on the experience level agreements and business metrics for you to continually measure, bringing all these six layers is going to be very critical. That’s when we see the organizations are very successful, and some of our proven examples exactly do the same that this is going to be very critical for organizations from a measurement standpoint.

Megan: Lots of tangible ways there that you can actually gauge value here. And you touched on governance and the impact of AI on governance is another huge talking point among senior leaders and interactions with data are a core part of that. To what extent is having the right governance and security protocols an integral part of having AI-ready data? To Bavesh, what scenarios do these systems need to handle? What does that mean for data models?

Bavesh: This is becoming kind of the prerequisite to deploying a successful AI project. I think MIT produced a report that said 95% of these new AI projects fail to actually generate business value. A big reason for that is you can go and prototype and stand up and vibe code a pilot, but when you’re actually moving a workload into production, you realize that governance becomes so critical.

So what do we really mean by governance? I think the first thing is getting your data in order, like I said, in open formats. Most companies realize now that the way they engage with their customers, the way they develop a drug, the way they approve a person for a credit limit increase, all of that enterprise information is actually their competitive advantage. Because you can go and use a frontier model like ChatGPT or Claude that everybody has access to.

Really the big competitive differentiator for most organizations is their own data and then their third-party data that they can add to it. Getting your data into an open format so you can understand your data and understanding your data is where governance comes in. Because when you think about governance, you really want to be able to find the data.

If I’m an end user or if I’m building an AI product, I want to know what data’s available to me. Can I trust the data? How fresh is the data? Is it coming from my analytics world or do I need a real-time system like a OLTP system? I need to find the data. I also need to make sure that access is controlled in a way that doesn’t cause any huge headaches from my organization. This becomes critical. If I have a whole bunch of PDFs that have purchase orders in them, who actually has access to all that data?

In a clinical trial, for example, in healthcare, you really want to ensure that people across trials don’t have visibility to patient data. Maybe the model that was used to build that was running across trial. Who has access to all the data? Who has access to only parts of the data? You really have to think about this. We also look at semantics of the data. Rajan brought this up right at the beginning of this, which is what is the context? How do we think about the metrics and all the things that the business users know in their head? We need to start codifying that somewhere. We have a product at Databricks called Unity Catalog where you can do the discovery, the access and the business semantics. You also want to share the data.

And in the world of agents, what we see is something called agent sprawl. In a very short order, just like how SaaS applications became very prevalent within any organization where they really solved a business problem. You go to a line of business and you say, “I need to be able to do credit underwriting” or “I am doing a prior authorization use case or pick thousands of use cases.” There’s a SaaS app for that. Much like that, there’s going to be this world in which agents are going to come into play, and most organizations are going to have lots of agents running all the time, but the reality of it is that how did that agent perform? What was the feedback loop from the user? What was the cost of running that workload and is it going up dramatically? And if you don’t have a way to monitor, to understand, and trace all the questions and answers and responses at scale, you’re going to find yourself in a big pickle. This actually could hurt your organization because users will be very confused about what to do.

When you look at governance, most organizations are recognizing that they have to start to understand what is it that they have put in place from a systems, from a process, from a tooling standpoint, focus on one use case, build out the governance for that, but build it in a way that’s going to allow you to become repeatable. AI is not going to be about one use case or two use cases. It’s whoever builds the flywheel of building many use cases in a safe, secure way, in a cost-effective way that’s driving a business outcome. If you don’t apply governance, it’s going to be very hard.

At Databricks, we made a big bet on governance four or five years ago. This is one of the main reasons our company’s growing right now because we can ensure that there’s quality data that’s going into all of your AI. You can use things like Genie and you can use things like Agent Bricks and you can build apps using Lakebase. None of that really works without governance. It’s really what we call the brain inside of Databricks.

Most of our customers spend a lot of time inside of Unity Catalog. And the great news is that AI is helping governance get set up much more quickly. We have a customer that three years ago, they were trying to get all of the data assets across all their domains from the customer, from the loyalty app, from the e-commerce engine. They had to go and map out all this data assets. AI is now doing a lot of their work for them. The human in the loop is just checking things.

We’ve made this much easier with AI. We always think about AI as a business use case and an outcome, which I think is going to be where the biggest value is. But at Databricks, we’re using AI inside of our platform to make it much easier to operate and to make it much easier to provide all the right things for your business. This is a super critical part of how we plan to innovate as AI takes fruition in the market.

Megan: And Rajan, Bavesh touched on this a little bit there, but does the integration of Agentic AI add another layer of complexity here too? What new consideration around governance does that raise?

Rajan: That’s a very, very valid question. I would like to take a metaphor to really explain. We are getting into the world of self-driving cars, robotaxis, and other things. While that takes us to the autonomous world, but still there are rules that you need to adhere to when you are driving on a road. The reason I’m bringing this metaphor is because what is actually required is actually adhering to the rules and different topographies, different things, depends upon where you are driving is going to be very, very critical. The complexity that agents are going to add is basically how you operate with those constraints.

For example, as a UTO, I can do 10 things, but say if I cannot approve a discount for more than 70% or I cannot give something as a bonus for someone because that is a part of the CFO, which an agent should be aware of.

That is one aspect, applying the constraints around it and making sure that the agents are adhering to the constraints. The second set of complexity that it builds is the tools to access. As a business, in today’s world, when you define a process, certain processes need a certain set of tools to really actionize it. There are certain entitlements, only people entitled to do certain things based on their identity, based on the need or the situation need, you need to govern. The third is information sharing. While MCP and other aspects are great, UCP and other aspects are great, but one critical thing is what you need to share, what you don’t need to share. And those are the critical considerations.

The last part is learning and relearning. Sometimes when you learn good things, you should keep something. Sometimes it is better for you to completely remove it and reevaluate in a newer way, relearn it in a newer way. These are all the critical things that are required. On the similar line for agents, it is going to be paramount, because when you are operating agents for an enterprise, you need to know, learn, and adhere to certain compliance related rules, business related constraints, and then the entitlement identity, and then sharing whatever that apply to a physical human will also start applying to an agent. That is where this is going to be very critical. This requires a new set of operating systems. That doesn’t really mean now get out of a new thing. That is where I’m just interpreting how Bavesh touched upon the Unity Catalog.

The best part that which we see and some of our clients that which are implementing is extending the Unity Catalog and the capabilities like now you can catalog the tools, catalog the MCP as well as catalog these agents, and then govern those agents based on the constraints, ground them based on the constraints.

It’s going to be very, very critical. Doing it not later, but starting that as part of your strategy and enforcing this as one of the critical dimensions of when you measure the value is also going to be very critical for an organization. It is like making sure that not only building the autonomous car, but as well as making sure that the car drives as per the rules of the road, not going rogue.

Megan: Lots to think about there. Fascinating stuff. Thank you. Just to close, with a quick look ahead, we all know the pace of development in AI and Agentic AI is so rapid. For those organizations that can prioritize AI-ready data now, what are the most compelling use cases for the technology that you can see coming to the fore in the next few years, Bavesh?

Bavesh: I think the excitement level is at its peak. We’ve seen so much investment in AI. I think the reason why there’s a lot of excitement is because you can look at the early adopters and you can see massive amounts of gains that these organizations are seeing. The one thing I will tell you is that the companies that there’s really three categories and the companies that I think are doing well, a lot of them started out with just copilots and things that are just giving people quick answers. Think about it as making an individual productive. That is the first phase. And the ROI on that has been somewhat questionable. With something like Genie, it makes it a lot more effective because it’s actually on your data and your data is contextualized in your organization. I think that’s one level of area that we’re going to see a lot of innovation. We’ll see most organizations just start to get the right information to the right person at the right time. And that has been a dream for a lot of organizations.

The second one is around automating entire business processes. We see functions within marketing, like I described earlier, or whether you’re going through a process of rebates for a company. There’s a whole bunch of steps involved where you have to go into three different apps and export data from Excel and put it over here. There’s thousands of people doing very laborious, monotonous, repeatable work. These agents are really going to help get an immense amount of not only productivity for the business process, but it’s just going to make things faster. Processes that took weeks are now going to take days. Processes that took days are going to take hours and minutes now.

One trend we’ve seen is that the AI world is so dynamic. In a world where you got lots of different players, you want to think about first principles, what are the foundations? You want to think about owning your data, making sure you have a handle on your structured and unstructured data. You want to put governance on that. But the other thing that you want to make sure that you don’t do is lock yourself in.

Today, if you think about it, Gemini is really good with multimodal. Anytime you have pictures or videos or things like that, Gemini just is super good. Whereas if you’re writing code, Claude is really good. If you’re just doing certain types of questions around introspection, ChatGPT is really good. What you really want is an open data platform where you can build your open AI on multiple clouds, which is what we built at Databricks.

I think that’ll help with the second piece, which is you can pick and choose because when you build these agents, you don’t have to be locked into just one. You should be picking the best quality and the best security and the best ROI and cost for a particular workload. One workload may use multiple of these models, and they might be even specific industry models. You need a system and a platform that can really handle this complexity.

I think the third category is business reimagination. A lot of people talk about this where, yes, you’re going to go and take the data and make it available and give everybody access to the data. You’re going to make existing processes much more efficient. But the third thing is there’s going to be brand new things that come out of it.

We have a very large customer who’s a bank and they have built a product that they didn’t have a year ago. Essentially, it’s machine learning and LLMs helping treasury departments forecast what their balances are going to be because they have more data at their fingertips. Historically, it took a long time for the data to get to the bankers. They were not able to really predict what a balance would be for a treasury department. Think about this for a big enterprise company, they have now built a brand new data AI solution that they’re monetizing and it’s generated hundreds of millions of dollars in the first six months. We’re seeing brand new lines of business open up and that is going to be really exciting because that’s where a lot of the transformation is going to happen. There’s going to be productivity. There’s going to be kind of automation at the business process level. Then there’s going to be these big new things that we didn’t even imagine that people are going to come up with.

We are actually seeing the early signals of this in every industry. We see retailers getting data at the hourly and the minute level so that they can integrate much more closely with their supply chains. We’re seeing much more targeted customer 360-degree use cases where as retailers or as consumers, we get annoyed by ads, but now it’s so contextualized and you have so much information about what really matters to your target customer, you’re giving them value added kind of information and that’s engaging them more. There’s a whole bunch of innovation happening with agentic commerce and things like concierge and virtualized shopping.

You look at any industry, there’s definitely new ways of doing things. This is what’s really exciting about AI, but you really have to not get too far ahead without thinking about what are the foundational things. You mentioned this earlier, which is open data platform, making sure you have governance correctly, making sure you think about your historical analytical data and your application data that’s going to be real time, having a good foundation to build on, that’s going to allow you to scale and move more quickly and compete in this new world.

We’re very excited about what we’re seeing with our customers and what they’re building. And honestly, that’s the best part about being in my role at Databricks, which is our teams really go to customers and say, “What are the outcomes you’re driving?” The early signals have been super positive. We’re seeing companies that get serious about all the foundational elements and really are methodical about building really outcome-based AI solutions, that 5% of projects that are being successful, those are wildly successful. That’s why we’re growing as a company because once you get a good project under your belt, that gets visibility within executives.

The last thing is that historically, a lot of tech has been in the IT department. You get the business designing how they want to go to market and how they’re going to compete and what products and services they want to offer. IT was the enabler and in many cases became the cost center and was relegated to rationalizing the portfolio of spend and tools.

But now we’re seeing the business kind of take the lead with AI where they want to understand, they want to know, “Hey, what can I be doing now that was not possible before?” We see this big opportunity just with AI literacy with business users where they’re very eager to understand how they should be thinking about AI. What does AI mean when you peel the covers? What are the pieces and the building blocks that you need to put in place, both from a technology and a training and an enablement standpoint? We’re spending a lot of time with executives helping them along this journey. We definitely see a lot of amazing opportunities ahead.

Megan: Yeah. So much innovation going on. And finally, how about yourself, Rajan? What on the horizon is exciting you the most?

Rajan: I think Bavesh covered quite a bit, but I think the way I’m seeing is today predominantly we are talking about labor shift. That means unlocking the potential of human or shifting the current way of working to the new way of working with the more efficiency game. It’s predominantly more of an efficiency game. I think that is what we are seeing now and the majority of the successful use cases around the labor shift. But what is pretty promising is the two kinds of shift, the business shifts.

What we are seeing as a new way of thinking or the new thing that is coming up is moving from system of execution or a system of engagement to system of action. That is the new way we see the road ahead. That is where some of the points that I touched upon. The business wants to have access to it, but how does it really make the real difference for it?

One classical example that I could clearly see which we have implemented for one of our customers primarily in the manufacturing space, is around the lifecycle of creation of a product and then publishing the content around the product in line with their different B2B marketplaces. Some of those, you are not just talking about recommending, creating, but actually you are able to reimagine this process, which used to involve five different departments, now can be done much faster, but at the same time gives you that veracity in terms of the decisioning that you are able to do and as far as how you’re able to actionize. That is the second thing which we are seeing.

The third part I think is also going to be is the way how the commerce has evolved. There is also not beyond that agentic commerce, but I think what we are seeing is that agent to agent commerce, agent to human commerce and agent to agent payments, agent to human payments, and then the content monetization.

These are the new set of business opportunities like building new business agentic products. It could be for family techs, it could be for on the consumer side, or it could be on the industrial technology side. These are going to be what I’m calling the economy shift, labor shift, business shift, because that is going to bring a new set of system of actions, moving them from the system of executions or the typical SaaS application with the bolt-on agentic, the so called agentic application. That is going to be a major transformation, and we are underway. But on the technology side, what is very critical for entrepreneuring is in today’s world you have data, analytical data, operational data, and then there is intelligence, there are different facets of it.

I think both this analytical core and operational core is going to really come into one. That’s why we are so gung-ho about the releases of Lakebase and other things because that is the way the future is going to drive. When they are really thinking about being ready for AI technology use cases, they should really think, how do you really create this unified core for the newer world?

The second part is people have to reimagine today, if I take SAP as an example, you do hundreds of edge applications, business applications needed to integrate another thing. Typically, we create sprawl of these integrations. One technology use case, people can say, “Hey, how do I really create a domain-based service mesh on top of this unified core and how do I make it more agentic integration ready?” That is one of the technology use cases that we are advising to the client.

I think now with a lot of the new areas that are coming around SAP, BDC with the Databricks, and this zero-based integration, that makes them rethink the way they need to integrate, the way they need to do things.

The third part, I think from a technology investment and technology, the use cases that most come for the technology that I would talk about is don’t just talk about now. This is the time that you have to, the way you own the people, the FTEs for your organizations. Agents are going to be your new FTEs.

That means that some of the new technology paradigm is going to be you will end up creating these co-intellects within your organization. That means you need to invest on what we call this agentic grid, where it becomes like a unified agentic fabric where every other agents can really collaborate and integrate and building on top of the same, the unified operational analytical core, the unified agentic integration on top of it, which is going to create a new set of experiences, agentic experiences rather than the traditional experiences or conversational experiences.

Then the new collaboration methods are going to be some of the critical aspects from a technology side that people have to really think from a technology standpoint. To start with, I would say you start looking at it from a data standpoint, building that unified core, building that unified integration and building that collaboration layer for both sharing and collaborating with intelligence as well as the agentic collaboration all governed under single umbrella. That is going to be the one critical use case which no one will feel bad about, and they are going to get really a 100X of their investments out of it.

Megan: Certainly no shortage of exciting developments on the horizon. Thank you both so much for that conversation. That was Bavesh Patel, senior vice president for Go-to-Market at Databricks and Rajan Padmanabhan, unit technology officer for data analytics and AI at Infosys, whom I spoke with from Brighton, England.

That’s it for this episode of Business Lab. I’m your host, Megan Tatum. I’m a contributing editor and host for Insights, the custom publishing division of MIT Technology Review. We were founded in 1899 at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and you can find us in print, on the web and at events each year around the world. For more information about us and the show, please check out our website at technologyreview.com.

This show is available wherever you get your podcasts, and if you enjoyed this episode, we hope you’ll take a moment to rate and review us. Business Lab is a production of MIT Technology Review, and this episode was produced by Giro Studios. Thanks for listening.

This content was produced by Insights, the custom content arm of MIT Technology Review. It was not written by MIT Technology Review’s editorial staff. It was researched, designed, and written by human writers, editors, analysts, and illustrators. This includes the writing of surveys and collection of data for surveys. AI tools that may have been used were limited to secondary production processes that passed thorough human review.

The missing step between hype and profit

This story originally appeared in The Algorithm, our weekly newsletter on AI. To get stories like this in your inbox first, sign up here.

In February, I picked up a flyer at an anti-AI march in London. I can’t say for sure whether or not its writers meant to riff on South Park’s underpants gnomes. But if they did, they nailed it: “Step 1: Grow a digital super mind,” it read. “Step 2: ? Step 3: ?”

Produced by Pause AI, an international activist group that co-organized the protest, it ended with this plea to the reader: “Pause AI until we know what the hell Step 2 is.” 

In the South Park episode “Gnomes,” which first aired in 1998, Kenny, Kyle, Cartman, and Stan discover a community of gnomes that sneak out at night to steal underpants from dressers. Why? The gnomes present their pitch deck. “Phase 1: Collect underpants. Phase 2: ? Phase 3: Profit.”

The gnomes’ business plan has since become one of the greats among internet memes, used to satirize everything from startup strategies to policy proposals. Memelord in chief Elon Musk once invoked it in a talk about how he planned to fund a mission to Mars. Right now, it captures the state of AI. Companies have built the tech (Step 1) and promised transformation (Step 3). How they get there is still a big question mark.

As far as Pause AI is concerned, Step 2 must involve some kind of regulation. But exactly what it will call for and who will enforce it are up for debate.

AI boosters, on the other hand, are convinced that Step 3 is salvation and tend to glaze over the middle bit. They see us racing toward sunny uplands on the back of an “economically transformative technology,” as OpenAI’s chief scientist, Jakub Pachocki, put it to me a few weeks ago. They know where they want to go—more or less: It’s hazy up there and still some way off. But everyone’s taking a different route. Will they all make it? Will anyone?

For every big claim about the future, there is a more sober assessment of how the rubber meets the road—one that quells the hype. Consider two recent studies. One, from Anthropic, predicted what types of jobs are going to be most affected by LLMs. (A takeaway: Managers, architects, and people in the media should prepare for change; groundskeepers, construction workers, and those in hospitality, not so much.) But their predictions are really just guesses, based on what kinds of tasks LLMs seem to be good at rather than how they really perform in the workplace.   

Another study, put out in February by researchers at Mercor, an AI hiring startup, tested several AI agents powered by top-tier models from OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind on 480 workplace tasks frequently carried out by human bankers, consultants, and lawyers. Every agent they tested failed to complete most of its duties.   

Why is there such wide disagreement? There are a number of factors. For a start, it’s crucial to consider who is making the claims (and why). Anthropic has skin in the game. What’s more, most of the people telling us that something big is about to happen have reached that conclusion largely on the basis of how fast AI coding tools are getting. But not all tasks can be hacked with coding. Other studies have found that LLMs are bad at making strategic judgment calls, for example.

What’s more, when they’re deployed, the tools aren’t just dropped into a cleanroom. They need to work in places contaminated with people and existing workflows. And sometimes adding AI will make things worse. Sure, maybe those workflows need to be torn up and refashioned around the new technology for it to achieve transformative status, but that will take time (and guts).  

That big hole? It’s right where Step 2 should be. The lack of agreement on exactly what’s about to happen—and how—creates an information vacuum that gets filled by the latest wild claim of the week, evidence be damned. We’re so unmoored from any real understanding of what’s coming and how it will be deployed that a single social media post can (and does) shake markets.

We need fewer guesses and more evidence. But that’s going to require transparency from the model makers, coordination between researchers and businesses, and new ways to evaluate this technology that tell us what really happens when it’s rolled out in the real world.

The tech industry (and with it the world’s economy) rests on the held-out promise that AI really will be transformative. But that is not yet a sure bet. Next time you hear bold claims about the future, remember that most businesses are still figuring out what to do with their underpants.

Elon Musk and Sam Altman are going to court over OpenAI’s future

After a yearslong legal feud, Elon Musk and OpenAI CEO Sam Altman are heading to trial this week in Northern California in a case that could have sweeping consequences. Ahead of OpenAI’s highly anticipated IPO, the court could rule on whether the company is allowed to exist as a for-profit enterprise and might even oust its current executive leadership, including Altman.

Musk is suing OpenAI, alleging that Altman and OpenAI president Greg Brockman deceived him into bankrolling the company in its early days by promising to maintain it as a nonprofit dedicated to developing AI that benefits humanity, only to later restructure the company to operate a for-profit subsidiary. Musk cofounded OpenAI with Altman and others in 2015, but he left in 2018 after a bitter power struggle. 

Musk is seeking as much as $134 billion in damages from OpenAI and Microsoft, one of OpenAI’s biggest financial backers. He is also asking the court to remove Altman and Brockman from their roles and to restore OpenAI as a nonprofit. Musk has asked the court to award any damages to OpenAI’s nonprofit rather than to him personally. 

Nine jurors will deliver an advisory verdict, a non-binding recommendation, to guide the judge in deciding Musk’s claims against Altman. Musk, Altman, and Brockman will take the stand. Former OpenAI chief scientist Ilya Sutskever, former OpenAI CTO Mira Murati, and Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella are also expected to testify. Cringey texts, raw diary entries, and endless scheming behind the founding and growth of OpenAI are expected to come to light.

In an industry enveloped in secrecy, the trial will be a rare opportunity for the public to look behind the curtain and find out what’s going on in the companies creating the most transformative technology ever built. 

What are they fighting about?

When OpenAI was originally founded as a nonprofit, backed by a $38 million donation from Musk, the company vowed to create open-source technology for the public’s benefit, unconstrained by a need to generate financial returns. But over the years, the company began to claim that intensifying competition could make it dangerous to share how it develops its AI models and that a nonprofit structure could not raise enough money to keep building AI. (MIT Technology Review was first to report on OpenAI’s internal conflicts around its mission.)

The court has already found that in 2017 Altman and Brockman wanted to establish a for-profit arm, while Musk proposed merging OpenAI with his electric-car company, Tesla. When Musk threatened to stop funding, Altman and Brockman told him that they were committed to keeping the company a nonprofit. Musk alleges that they pursued plans to pivot to a for-profit without informing him. According to OpenAI, Musk agreed that the company needed a for-profit entity and even wanted to be its CEO. 

But even if Musk proves he was duped by Altman and Brockman, he may not have standing in the first place to sue them for restructuring the company to operate a for-profit subsidiary. Some legal scholars are puzzled over why the judge allowed him to bring this claim. “The idea that Elon Musk can sue because he was a donor or used to be on the board is pretty puzzling,” says Jill Horwitz, a law professor who studies nonprofit law at Northwestern University. “Typically, it’s up to the attorneys general to bring such a claim to enforce the charitable purposes. And that’s already happened.” 

In October 2025, state attorneys general of California, where OpenAI is headquartered, and Delaware, where OpenAI is incorporated, struck a deal with OpenAI to approve its new corporate structure on a series of conditions. For example, a safety and security committee at the nonprofit would review safety-related decisions made by the for-profit subsidiary. Critics of the restructuring, including Musk, AI safety advocates, and civil society groups, have tried to stop it. 

California’s attorney general has declined to join Musk’s lawsuit, saying that the office did not see how his action serves the public interest.

Still, whether the deal holds OpenAI to its nonprofit mission is an open question. “Elon Musk should have to show … what the deficiencies are in what’s been agreed to by OpenAI with the attorneys general,” says Rose Chan Loui, the director of the UCLA School of Law’s philanthropy and nonprofit program. Even with the terms in place, holding OpenAI to them depends on “how much they can enforce it and how much transparency they get into OpenAI’s work.”

More importantly, legal experts say the case is being considered under the wrong body of law. Musk argues that Altman and Brockman breached OpenAI’s charitable trust by creating a closed-source, for-profit subsidiary. As a result, the court has been analyzing the claim under the law of trusts. “But OpenAI is not a trust. OpenAI is a corporation. And so really they should be looking at … the law of charitable nonprofit organizations,” says Chan Loui.

What’s on the line?

Despite all the legal muddiness, the outcome of the trial could upend the AI race. Any one of the remedies that Musk seeks could cripple OpenAI as it races to go public by the end of the year. OpenAI, which is valued at over $850 billion, has described the litigation with Musk as a potential risk to its business. Musk’s rival company xAI, which makes the chatbot Grok, is expected to go public as a part of his rocket company SpaceX as early as June. If Musk prevails, xAI, which in combination with SpaceX is valued at $1.25 trillion, could get a big advantage in the AI race. 

And the trial has helped expose the bitter schism between Musk and the company he once helped to found. An OpenAI spokesperson referred MIT Technology Review to a post on X: “This lawsuit has always been a baseless and jealous bid to derail a competitor.” Although Musk’s lawyers did not immediately respond to a request for comment, he has posted on X that “Scam Altman lies as easily as he breathes.”  

MIT Technology Review will have ongoing coverage of Musk v. Altman until its conclusion. Follow @techreview or @michelletomkim on X for up-to-the-minute reporting. 

GenAI Citations, Explained

ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and other generative AI platforms occasionally include source links in their responses. The links are called citations and may appear within an answer or in a separate panel, often to the right.

Understanding the citation algorithms is key to creating an optimization strategy. Here’s what we know about genAI citations.

Screenshot of a ChatGPT response showing a numbered list of walking shoe comparison URLs, with an Activity panel on the right displaying 22 sources. Red arrows highlight the connection between inline source badges in the main response and their corresponding citations in the Sources panel.

Citations in ChatGPT often appear in a right-side panel. Click image to enlarge.

Citation Methods

No leading genAI platform has explained its citation algorithm or provided optimization guidance. Yet it’s clear from analyzing citations and traditional search rankings that Google powers ChatGPT, Gemini, AI Mode, and Grok, while Brave drives Claude and Perplexity.

Thus maintaining high rankings on both of those search engines increases the likelihood of being cited. An exception is ChatGPT’s practice of citing its publication partners regardless of external rankings.

Citations and Sources

From patents and independent studies, we know of four types of citations.

Grounded citations influence the answer itself. The platforms run searches, crawl the content of indexed pages, and quote those sources in the response.

Ungrounded citations support and confirm the platforms’ existing training data without influencing the answer directly. I call these “reverse” citations for that reason. Presumably ungrounded citations exist to foster accuracy and objectivity from known, reliable companies.

The frequency of ungrounded citations is largely a mystery. However, a recent New York Times article referred to an analysis by Oumi, an AI development firm, that found “more than half” of the citations on AI Overviews (powered by Gemini) are ungrounded.

Ghost citations are links in answers that lack a source name. This presumably occurs because the source didn’t explain how its product or service solved the query. According to a study published this month from search optimizer Kevin Indig, 61.7% of answers include a ghost citation.

Invisible citations are not, in fact, citations; they are instances of genAI using a site’s info without mentioning or linking to it. A study released this month by Ahrefs found 50.2% of URLs retrieved by ChatGPT remain uncited. Moreover, in my experience, Reddit threads often influence answers, but very few are cited.

GEO Strategy

Knowing how genAI citations work can help elevate your business’s visibility.

Influencing an answer is different from being cited in it. Still, appearing in any answer is better than not, especially if it includes your products.

Training data is fundamental. GenAI platforms may answer queries from varied sources, but start with training data. The platforms may search Google or Brave only after creating an answer, or they may provide an answer exclusively from external pages.

Regardless, direct or indirect associations with prompts expose a brand to the platform. That’s the priority.

Google Tests ‘Ask YouTube’ Conversational Search Experiment via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

YouTube is testing “Ask YouTube,” a conversational search experience that returns AI-generated text summaries alongside cited videos and supports follow-up questions in a persistent thread.

YouTube describes the feature on its Premium Early Access page as “a new way to search on YouTube that feels more like a conversation.” Users can ask complex questions, receive results that combine video and text, and ask follow-ups to dive deeper.

How It Works

After opting in to the experimental feature, An “Ask YouTube” button appears in the search bar.

Screenshot from: YouTube, April 2026.

When a query is submitted, the page briefly loads, then displays a text summary, a primary cited video linked to a timestamped section, and galleries of longform videos and Shorts.

The experiment is available to Premium subscribers in the US who are 18 or older, searching in English on desktop, and runs until June 8.

How It Behaves In Practice

I tested the feature with a query about reactions to Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.7 model. Here’s an example to illustrate how Ask YouTube presents results:

Screenshot from: YouTube, April 2026.

In my test, the page displayed a generated title (“User Reactions to Claude Opus 4.7”), a subhead, a summary paragraph, and an embedded video with a timestamp to a related section. Below are citations, related videos, and Shorts.

Follow-up questions can be asked within the same thread. Here’s an example of a follow-up question I asked: “how does it compare to GPT 5.5”

Screenshot from: YouTube, April 2026.

This response even included a comparison table with links to the videos it pulled the data from:

Screenshot from: YouTube, April 2026.

YouTube notes on its experiment page that “quality and accuracy may vary” and asks users to submit thumbs-up or thumbs-down feedback with optional rationale.

Why This Matters

This expands YouTube’s AI search testing beyond the carousel. YouTube first tested AI Overviews in search results last year, showing video clips for product and location queries. Ask YouTube now summarizes content as text upfront, with videos as supporting sources and related results.

For creators, the key question is what makes a video the main citation rather than a supporting item or an omission. YouTube hasn’t shared selection or ranking signals for Ask YouTube.

Looking Ahead

The experiment ends June 8 unless YouTube extends it. We’ll provide an update if YouTube publishes selection signals or rolls the feature out more broadly.


Featured Image: Stockinq/Shutterstock

Bing Previews AI Citation Share For Webmaster Tools via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

Microsoft previewed four new AI reporting features for Bing Webmaster Tools: citation share, grounding query-intent labels, grounding query topic labels, and Generative Engine Optimization (GEO)-focused recommendations.

Krishna Madhavan, Principal Product Manager at Microsoft AI and Bing, previewed the features during a presentation at SEO Week in New York City. Slides shared by attendees on X preview four additions to the AI Performance dashboard.

Citation Share would show the percentage of citations a site captures within a specific grounding query, sitting alongside the raw citation counts already available in the dashboard.

Grounding Query Intent would classify queries into 15 predefined intent labels. Visible labels in the shared screenshots include Learning, Informational Search, Navigational, Research, Comparison, Planning, Conversational, and Content Filtered.

Grounding Query Topic would group queries under topic labels, giving sites a second classification layer alongside intent.

The fourth addition, GEO-focused recommendations, would surface guidance tied to AI visibility. The slide shows recommendation areas, including content structure and crawlability, indexing and canonicalization signals, structured data adoption, and structured data quality.

Microsoft hasn’t published an official blog post about these features. The information available comes from attendee screenshots of the presentation.

https://x.com/ClaraSoteras/status/2048768514677244182?s=20

Why This Matters

The AI Performance dashboard launched in public preview in February, giving sites their first look at how often Microsoft Copilot and Bing AI summaries cite their content. Microsoft expanded it in March with a feature that mapped grounding queries to the specific pages cited for them.

Citation Share would expand that. Citation counts show visibility, while a share metric provides competitive context, indicating if a site captures most citations or appears with others for a query.

The intent and topic classifications could fix data limits in the dashboard. Queries vary in phrasing, making trend spotting hard. Grouping by intent and topic allows sites to gauge visibility against shared categories instead of individual phrases.

GEO recommendations are least defined. Labels imply focus areas are familiar SEO basics like crawlability, indexing, canonicalization, and structured data, but Microsoft hasn’t specified how recommendations are generated or triggered.

Looking Ahead

Microsoft hasn’t announced release dates for any of the four features. Details on Citation Share calculation, intent and topic taxonomies, and GEO recommendation methods remain undocumented publicly.

Treat these as previews, not shipped features. Watch for official Bing Webmaster or Microsoft Advertising blog posts confirming scope and timing.

GoDaddy Transferred A Domain By Mistake And Refused To Fix It via @sejournal, @martinibuster

GoDaddy is alleged to have transferred a domain name without authorization from it’s longtime registrant, transferring the domain name without the proper authorization and the required documentation. The victim spent nearly ten hours with customer service only to receive the response that there is nothing GoDaddy could do to fix the problem.

Domain Transfer Happened On A Saturday

Interestingly, the rogue domain transfer happened on a Saturday, which could be an important detail because some domain registrars outsource their customer service on the weekends and I have heard of other occasions where mistakes have occurred due to less quality control. I know of a case where high-value domain names worth six to seven figures were stolen on a weekend where an attacker was able to manipulate the weekend customer service into changing the email address of the account, enabling the thief to transfer away all of the one and two-word domains to another account.

What happened with this specific domain was not a case of robbery but something worse. A weekend customer service person made a mistake processing a legitimate domain name change by another GoDaddy customer, and instead of initiating the change on the correct domain they transferred the victim’s domain instead.

Compounding the error, GoDaddy’s weekend customer service failed to follow their own protocol for preventing unauthorized transfers, thereby allowing the domain to be transferred to someone else.

32 Calls And Nearly 10 Hours Of Phone Calls

The process of getting GoDaddy to reverse it’s mistake was a bureaucratic nightmare. They placed thirty-two phone calls and spent 9.6 hours on the phone talking to GoDaddy’s customer service.

“Lee called GoDaddy on Sunday. They confirmed the domain was no longer in his account but could not say where it went due to privacy concerns. They told him to email undo@godaddy.com. He did but did not receive any type of response when emailing that address. Of course Lee didn’t really feel like this was the appropriate level of urgency for this issue. He asked for a supervisor who was even less helpful. Lee was not happy. He may have said some hurtful things to GoDaddy’s support personnel during this call. That first call lasted 2 hours, 33 minutes, and 14 seconds.

On Monday morning, Lee and a coworker started working in earnest on this issue because there was still no update from GoDaddy. Calling in yielded a different agent who told Lee to email transferdisputes@godaddy.com instead. By Tuesday the address had changed again to artreview@godaddy.com. The instructions shifted by the day. It seemed like every GoDaddy tech support person had a slightly different recommendation.”

Compounding the error was that every time the victim called GoDaddy the call generated a new case number with none of the case numbers tied to any of the previous ones.

GoDaddy’s Response

After four days of trying to get through to someone at GoDaddy to get the problem resolved, GoDaddy finally responded with the following resolution:

“After investigating the domain name(s) in question, we have determined that the registrant of the domain name(s) provided the necessary documentation to initiate a change of account. … GoDaddy now considers this matter closed.”

GoDaddy’s response contained links to how to dispute a domain name change at ICAAN, the global organization that manages the domain name system, instructions on how to look up the domain name registration information and a customer support page about contacting legal representation.

That’s it.

Error Fixed, But Not By GoDaddy

The person who wrote about the issue said that they contacted a friend within GoDaddy who was then able to have the matter properly dealt with. Ultimately the error was not fixed by GoDaddy but by the innocent person who discovered someone else’s domain name in their GoDaddy account.

As previously stated, the entire fiasco began with a mistake on the part of GoDaddy on a legitimate domain change request. GoDaddy changed the domain name being changed to the victim’s domain name. The person who ended up with the victim’s domain name in their account contacted the victim and between the two of them they began the process of transferring the domain back to the rightful registrant.

Domain Name Ownership Is Non-Existent

A common mistake made by many developers and business owners is that they believe that they own a domain name. That is incorrect, nobody owns a domain name. Domain names are registered but never owned. The registration entitles the registrant to use the domain name but they never actually own it. That is how the domain name system works and it’s a part of the reason for why this issue played out the way it did. However,  the problem in this case was due solely to a mistake by GoDaddy.

The post that detailed the nightmare refers to GoDaddy’s “domain ownership protection” services but that’s not actually what it is called. There is no such thing domain name ownership protection.

What GoDaddy sells is a Domain Protection service that protects against unauthorized transfers and accidental expiration. The victim paid for that protection but because the error was due to GoDaddy’s own mistake the protection did nothing for the victim, the domain change went through without the proper documentation.

Read the blog post about how GoDaddy made a mistake and not only failed to fix the problem, they didn’t even acknowledge they had made a mistake.

GoDaddy Gave a Domain to a Stranger Without Any Documentation

Featured Image by Shutterstock/AVA Bitter

Google’s AI Overviews Cut Organic Clicks 38%, Field Study Finds via @sejournal, @MattGSouthern

A randomized field experiment finds Google’s AI Overviews reduce organic clicks to external websites by 38% on queries where they appear, while self-reported search satisfaction stays nearly unchanged when the summaries are removed.

The working paper by researchers at the Indian School of Business and Carnegie Mellon University was posted to SSRN this month. Authors Saharsh Agarwal and Ananya Sen describe it as the first randomized field experiment to test how AI Overviews affect user behavior in a real browsing environment.

How The Experiment Worked

Agarwal and Sen built a Chrome extension that randomly assigned 1,065 U.S. participants to one of three groups. People were recruited from Prolific and used Chrome on desktop. They also had to meet minimum browsing-history thresholds, so the sample reflects active desktop Chrome users rather than all Google users.

The control group saw Google Search normally. A “Hide AIO” group had the extension remove AI Overviews in real time. A third group was redirected to Google’s AI Mode for all searches. The study ran for two weeks per participant between January and February 2026.

Researchers pre-registered the experiment with the AEA RCT Registry before data collection. Over 95% of users in the Hide AIO group did not detect any changes during the study.

What The Researchers Found

AI Overviews appeared on 42% of queries, and removing them increased outbound clicks from 0.38 to 0.61 per search. They reduced outbound organic clicks by 38% on triggered queries, with zero-click search rising from 54% to 72%.

Effects were strongest when AI Overviews appeared at the top of the page, which occurred 85% of the time. Removing top-position AI Overviews nearly doubled outbound clicks, but lower ones had no effect.

Sponsored clicks and search frequency remained steady, indicating substitution between AI Overviews and organic visits.

The User Experience Finding

The endline survey used a 1-to-5 Likert scale to assess participants’ search experience. Responses from the control and Hide AIO groups were nearly identical across all measures, including satisfaction, information quality, and ease of finding information.

The researchers wrote that AI Overviews “divert traffic away from publishers without delivering measurable improvements in user experience.

How AI Mode Compared

Participants directed to AI Mode had lower outbound click rates, higher zero-click rates, and lower satisfaction at endline compared to other groups.

The authors note that these results are exploratory, as higher attrition, some uninstalling of the extension, or finding workarounds may have influenced the outcomes.

Why This Matters

Independent measurements of the impact of AI Overviews on traffic have mostly been correlational. Pew Research found users click 8% of the time with AI Overviews, compared to 15% without. Ahrefs analyzed GSC data and reported a 58% drop in click-through rate for top-ranking pages when AI Overviews appeared.

This experiment adds a different approach by randomly assigning users to see AI Overviews or not, isolating the causal effect.

Google VP Liz Reid claims AI Overviews cut “bounce clicks,’ but provides no data backing the user-benefit side. The Agarwal and Sen paper tested a related question with a randomized design, finding no measurable change in satisfaction or ease of finding info.

Looking Ahead

The paper is a draft on SSRN and is not peer-reviewed. Authors will add more results, and we will provide an update if findings change.