AI Engineer World's Fair 2026

The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach — Rania Khalaf, WSO2

Read the talk

The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach

Selected presentation frame from The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach — Rania Khalaf, WSO2 at 191 secondsOpen full source frame
Khalaf’s three focus areas: Scientist, Architect and Coach.

Rania Khalaf explains how company type, AI maturity and personal strengths shape the Chief AI Officer role—and how to measure useful change without turning token consumption into the goal.

From a talk by Rania Khalaf

At a glance

Ideas worth remembering

  • Shape the Chief AI Officer role around company type, AI maturity and personal strengths. Scientist, architect and coach describe both an allocation of work and ranges within that work.

  • Start with the operation that needs help. In the corn embryo example, basic blob detection supplied the needed measurement without machine learning.

  • Measure distributed AI fluency, adoption depth and useful outcomes. Token consumption is easy to game, and the measurement set should change as the company matures.

  • Agent use changes product interfaces, documentation and pricing. Internal product use also needs a feedback loop that leads to improvements.

  • Cross-company AI leadership needs strong CEO support, while a sustainable personal mandate needs work that fits the leader’s skills and interests.

When AI is in everything, the job can become everything

Hiring a Chief AI Officer creates an immediate scope problem: AI can touch products, operations, revenue, employee skills and customer relationships. Assigning all of that to one person can produce an overwhelming job before it produces a coherent strategy. Rania Khalaf, Chief AI Officer at WSO2, draws on nearly two years in the role and about five years in related roles to explain how to give it a workable shape.

The opening audience questions establish two useful distinctions: does the company build and sell software, and does someone other than the CEO or CTO lead AI? The same title can describe very different responsibilities depending on company type and AI maturity. The person’s background adds another dimension. Some companies create the role around a particular individual; others recruit for a specific need, then adjust the scope to the person they find. Sometimes the responsibilities split into two jobs.

Khalaf’s response to that ambiguity is to divide the work into three focus areas: scientist, architect and coach. The division makes it possible to discuss what the company needs, what the leader should spend time doing, and which responsibilities need complementary people.

0:212:30
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

0:12 · section reference included

Three hats, each with its own range

The three focus areas describe different kinds of work, even though all can involve building:

  • Scientist: Explore, experiment and build to understand what the technology can do.
  • Architect: Connect that capability to company strategy. For a software company, this includes new products and changes to existing products. Elsewhere, it can include productivity, cost reduction, new revenue streams or access to new markets. Board-facing responsibility also means explaining how the AI work helps the company and its customers.
  • Coach: Help employees and customers understand, adopt and use AI. Education, repeated communication and advice are substantial parts of the job.

Coaching was the surprise after twenty years at IBM Research, where Khalaf had run about a third of the global AI research organization. Research leadership had not prepared her for how much time adoption requires. Customer conversations begin with the customer’s problem and an explanation of how to approach it. If WSO2’s technology does not fit, the advice can point elsewhere. Customers who use none of its AI capabilities may still need help thinking through future possibilities.

Each hat also has a slider. The scientist ranges from exploring existing technology to inventing new technology; a PhD is not required at the exploratory end. Khalaf nevertheless recommends keeping some people experimenting, because a fast-changing field requires direct experience with new capabilities. The architect ranges from business stewardship to reshaping company strategy. A steward evaluates proposed projects, prioritizes them, allocates a budget, manages delivery and reports results. That position can demand more business knowledge and operating skill than deep AI expertise.

The coach’s slider runs from inward to outward. A company still learning to use AI needs employee education and opportunities to experience limitations such as hallucination firsthand. A more mature company may spend more time helping customers and the community. These are settings to choose for the organization, rather than stages every leader must pass through in the same way.

Selected presentation frame from The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach — Rania Khalaf, WSO2 at 459 secondsOpen full source frame
Three sliders show ranges for Scientist, Architect and Coach, including inward-to-outward coaching.

Khalaf used Claude and Gemini to map résumés and job postings onto these sliders. That exercise supplied another way to examine how a person’s skills influence the role; it is an exploratory comparison, rather than an established hiring test. Her own career provides the more concrete examples.

3:013:30
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

3:01 · section reference included

A seed company needs different AI work from a software company

After IBM Research, Khalaf joined an agricultural biotech unicorn in the Cambridge area. It used CRISPR on corn, soy and wheat to produce plants that made more food and used less water. Validating a gene edit could take ten years and substantial land. The opening for AI and data work was therefore upstream: help scientists form better hypotheses about which edits to attempt before committing to those expensive experiments.

The mandate soon expanded. The company had strong geneticists and agricultural specialists, but fewer engineering specialists and no data engineers. Being the “computer person” brought responsibility for IT and hiring a CISO as well as AI. Because the business sold bags of seeds, it could buy infrastructure rather than build a platform to sell: it became an AWS shop and purchased Databricks. Engineering time covered both gene-discovery algorithms and ordinary IT changes, including a move from Box to Microsoft. The latter work was useful, but it was not where Khalaf found her joy.

At WSO2, the balance is approximately 20% scientist, 60% architect and 20% coach. A small research team supports the scientist work, while company strategy centers on the agentic enterprise fabric. About 75% of employees are technical, and the workforce is curious enough that much of the coaching points outward to customers. The allocation of time across hats and the position of each slider are separate choices: spending 20% of the job coaching does not say whether that coaching serves employees or customers.

The biotech work often needed established techniques, clean and integrated data, and changes to existing processes. Consider the corn embryo example. Scientists hypothesized that embryo size indicated how likely the next gene-editing step was to succeed. Human measurement was too costly, so they asked whether AI could perform it. Khalaf’s computer-vision background led to a simpler choice: blob detection, using basic computer vision without machine learning.

The change was from an expensive manual measurement to a simple algorithm that Khalaf reports worked well. The useful capability was measuring the embryo; that measurement could then serve the scientists’ hypothesis about success in the next step. The account does not quantify measurement accuracy or establish the hypothesis’s predictive strength, so the result supports the choice of a simpler measurement method rather than a claim that it improved gene-editing success. The example makes the architect’s decision concrete: identify the operation that needs help, then choose the technique that supplies it.

Across these settings, three questions help shape the role: does the company sell software, is its workforce mainly technical, and where is it in its AI journey? They explain why one organization needs infrastructure and inward education while another needs product strategy and outward advice.

8:218:51
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

8:21 · section reference included

Measure fluency and depth of adoption, rather than token volume

A request to measure tokens as a way to show how much AI the company used received a firm no. Token consumption is easy to count and easy to game. If the target rewards consumption, people can increase consumption without improving their work. Khalaf instead looks at whether AI capability has spread through the organization and how deeply it changes what teams do.

Selected presentation frame from The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach — Rania Khalaf, WSO2 at 804 secondsOpen full source frame
A snapshot groups measures under Company & workforce, Software products and Market & ecosystem.

The organizational measures answer different questions:

  • Workforce fluency: Can people in marketing and engineering do enough with AI to improve their own work, or does every request depend on a few specialists in a center of excellence? WSO2 has a small central AI team, an AI lead in every product, and people developing AI capabilities within each product team. In AI-first products, everybody works on AI.
  • Depth of adoption: Is a team polishing emails or using code completion, changing an entire workflow for a better outcome, or working alongside agents it can instantiate? Different teams occupy different points on that spectrum.
  • Tool availability: Does the company actually provide access through subscriptions, reimbursement, team accounts or enterprise accounts?

GEO—generative engine optimization—adds a discoverability question: can LLMs find the company and understand what it does when someone searches? Khalaf describes this as ongoing work whose methods are still difficult to pin down. The accompanying anecdote captures the tension: someone frustrated by a web written for agents had decided to let LLMs read and summarize it, reserving conversation for humans. Making information accessible to models can create pressure on its usefulness to human readers.

12:5217:19
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

12:52 · section reference included

Make products usable by agents—and keep the feedback loop

Product strategy initially asked what WSO2 should build, what it should extend and where it should partner. It then moved toward making every product consumable by agents and LLMs. Supporting an agent inside a product and allowing an agent to use that product are different requirements. In the previous year, WSO2 added first-class support for agents, LLMs and tools across its products. In the year of the talk, the goal was to provide the documentation and interfaces agents need to use them, including MCP servers, skills and CLIs.

Two adjacent decisions matter as usage changes:

  • Agent-proof pricing: Per-seat pricing raises questions when agents generate consumption without corresponding human seats. Khalaf reports that WSO2’s pricing is consumption-based, tying the model to usage.
  • Dogfooding with feedback: Internal use can expose product problems, but mandatory use alone does not improve the product. An anecdote about employees whose feedback went nowhere motivates the requirement to close the loop: teams should use the stack because it helps them, and their experience should influence improvements.

Market and ecosystem measures look beyond internal activity. Earned thought leadership includes invitations to speak, publications and press attention generated by interesting work. Analyst recognition, customer adoption and concrete customer use cases offer other signals. For a company Khalaf describes as 100% open source, community participation, adoption, stars and forks also matter.

Annual recurring revenue from AI products remains part of the picture. Some products are too new to generate much ARR, so adoption and ecosystem signals help assess progress while they get established. The measurement set should change as the products and company mature. That follows directly from the incentive problem behind the token refusal: people optimize what gets measured, so the measures need to reward the next useful change.

14:4815:18
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

14:48 · section reference included

Extend existing platforms into an agent lifecycle

WSO2 provides the product example behind the architect role. At the time of the talk, Khalaf describes a roughly twenty-year-old company with about 150 million in ARR and software used in over 90 countries across six continents. Its established portfolio spans API platforms, integration platforms, identity and access management, and an internal developer platform. The AI strategy builds on those existing responsibilities.

The extensions follow the jobs those platforms already perform:

  • API management → AI gateway: AI APIs are still APIs, but their interactions need different management. The API platform gains an AI gateway to govern those interactions.
  • Human identity → agent identity: Experience managing identities and access for humans becomes the basis for managing agent identity.
  • Integration → agent building: The integration platform gains an agent builder.
  • Individual capabilities → lifecycle management: An agent platform brings these capabilities together to manage the whole agent lifecycle. Agent Manager is the newest release named in the talk.
Selected presentation frame from The Chief AI Officer: Scientist, Architect, Coach — Rania Khalaf, WSO2 at 1110 secondsOpen full source frame
WSO2’s portfolio diagram shows AI-related extensions across its platform areas.

How do the existing platforms contribute to the new agent platform? The diagram shows the stated product relationships. API governance, identity and integration provide different capabilities that the agent platform brings together. This is the architectural direction described in the talk; it does not specify runtime call order or deployment topology.

The scientist work continues alongside that strategy. The small research group produced three publications that year; two involved undergraduates in Sri Lanka publishing for the first time, and one won a Best Paper Award. The two hats therefore coexist: research produces new work while architecture incorporates AI capabilities throughout the company’s digital fabric.

How it fits togetherExisting platform responsibilities feed the agent platform

Existing API-management capability.

AI-specific extensions build on API management, identity and integration, then come together for agent lifecycle management.

17:1917:49
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

17:19 · section reference included

CEO backing makes the scope workable; personal fit makes it sustainable

The ending returns to organizational design. A Chief AI Officer must work closely with many other parts of the company, so Khalaf recommends strong CEO backing and a strong relationship with the CEO. The role’s cross-company scope makes that support consequential: product strategy, employee adoption and customer work all depend on cooperation beyond the AI team.

Ownership can take unexpected forms. In some AI-forward companies, the Chief Product Officer and Chief AI Officer are one person. In some non-software companies, the head of HR has become the head of AI, on the reasoning that agents are part of the workforce and HR manages the workforce. Khalaf is openly unsure about that arrangement. These examples show companies still deciding which existing responsibilities should absorb AI leadership; they are not recommendations for a universal reporting structure.

For someone considering the role, its fluidity also creates room to choose. Khalaf closes with advice to seek the intersection of what you are good at, what you love, what the world needs and what you can be paid for. Her biotech experience gives that advice a practical edge: a valuable mandate can still grow into work that does not suit you. Shape the role around a good match, arrange for others to handle responsibilities that fit them better, or find a company whose needs align more closely with your strengths and interests.

20:003:01
Suggest correction

This note stays in this page until you copy or download it. Nothing is submitted; reloading clears the draft.

20:00 · section reference included

Read the complete timestamped transcript
  1. 0:12

    Hi, everyone. How are you? All right. I'm so excited to see all of you here still awake and ready.

  2. 0:21

    Um, so today I wanted to, uh, share my experiences on, uh, the Chief AI Officer role. It's very new. I get a lot of questions about it. I've been in this role for nearly two years and some variant of it for about the last five. And, um, I wanted to-- So to get started, I just would like to get an idea about the folks around here. Um, how many are in companies that build and sell software products?

  3. 0:50

    All right, great. Um, and, um, how many folks are, uh, have someone leading AI that is not the CEO or the CTO?

  4. 1:05

    All right, very cool. So we'll, we'll jump right in. This helps.

  5. 1:12

    Um, so like I was mentioning, this role is new, but it's becoming more and more popular. And what I found is that it means drastically different things based on two criteria. One is the company-- the type of company you're working for, and two is the level of AI maturity of that company. There's also another dimension which really is depending on the skill set and the background of the person in the role, and I've seen that also vary a lot. And in some cases, the role was

  6. 1:41

    created for a particular person that brings a particular skill set, right? Um, in other cases, there was a very specific need and people hired in for it, right? So we'll see, because it's so hard to hire for this role specifically, we'll also see that, um, there's a lot of open-mindedness in the companies that, that are recruiting for it for exactly what the person might do based on the person they find and how well that fits and if they can complement it. So I've also seen it sometimes breaking into two.

  7. 2:11

    Um, but the really interesting things is you see, like even these IBM studies one year apart, uh, so it was like eleven percent in twenty twenty-four, thirty-six percent in twenty-five, and now seventy-six percent. Um...

  8. 2:30

    Okay. So the tricky thing about this role is like, it's so great, "Okay, I have an AI officer," but there's AI in everything, right? It's kinda like saying digital or, I don't know, electricity. It, it's in everything, and it can be so many things, and it can be really overwhelming, right? So you have to have a lot of discipline to do it well and to still have joy and not to get overwhelmed and overloaded. Um, so how can we do that? So in my experience, it's been about breaking it into three focus areas. Um,

  9. 3:01

    I use the word scientist, architect, and coach. I'll explain a little more. So scientist is more, um, you're exploring, you're experimenting, you're building. Architect, you're also building, but you're also doing a lot more strategy. If the company is selling software product, you're really thinking about creating new software. You're impacting the product strategy. Um, if the company doesn't build software product, you're creating, you're adding AI in ways that affect not only the bottom line and like cost takeout and productivity, but

  10. 3:30

    also the top line in terms of, um, new revenue streams or getting to new markets and so on. Um, I'm putting also there is one piece that is, uh, quite important here. So like I'm in a board-facing role, right? So I have to report out to the, to our board in both this company and the previous one I was in. And so for that, there's also part of the job that's like responsibility for the, what we're doing in AI and how that is helping the company and our customers. And finally, for

  11. 4:00

    coach, the coach one surprised me. Um, I had spent twenty years in IBM Research, um, running about a third of the global research AI organization, and when I took my first job in this role, I forgot that you have to really spend a lot of time, um, evangelizing, educating, sharing, over-communicating about what you're doing, about what, how AI can help, about ways people can adopt it, not only to your employees, but also to your

  12. 4:30

    customers. And now in this role, I also spend a lot of time as like trusted advisor to s- many of our customers. So people in my role and other customers or CTOs that are starting to adopt AI, right? They, they want to learn about, "Okay, what's happening in other places?" So I do a lot of calls with customers, and I'm never going to be like, "Here, buy my thing," right? Um, that happens later downstream if they're interested. My discussions are always, "What problems are you having? This is how we think about the problem."

  13. 5:01

    And I have no slides, but that's okay. Does it come back?

  14. 5:09

    Well, while you fix it, I'll say a few more words. Right. So the conversation I have with them is more of a, a trusted advisor. Like, I understand what problems they're having. I see if our technology fits. If our stuff doesn't fit, I might direct them to an- another thing that works much better for them and where they are, and sometimes they'll come back, or they'll just wanna have a discussion again. Um, we have many products, uh, that are also not AI first, so you know, we-- I might talk to some customers that don't use any of our AI capability, right? But they want to think about what they could do in the

  15. 5:39

    future. Thank you. Um...

  16. 5:47

    And then each of these focus areas has a range, and I think this range really depends on the kind of company and the skill set that you're bringing to the role. So for the scientist, like even at one set, you don't have to have a PhD. You're just exploring heavily. I do believe in this AI world that's moving so, so quickly- Um, you have to always have some of your team experimenting and understanding what's new and trying it out and seeing how it fits, right? I don't think there's a way around that because the tech is moving so fast. Um, but on the other h-end is, like,

  17. 6:17

    the creator, inventor side of the house. For the architects, I've also seen-- I was surprised by this because I discovered it when I got an email, um, saying something like, uh, "AI education for chief AI officers." And I'm like, "Wait, what? Like, how do you get this job if you don't know about AI?"

  18. 6:38

    And then I realized that there are some companies that they have someone in the role that really understands the business, and they're really a steward. So they have a budget, and they're trying to understand, you know, people propose projects, and they're trying to understand which projects will bring enough value, and they prioritize, and they allocate budget, and they project manage them, and they report out, right? So for that, you don't need deep AI knowledge, but you need to understand the business really well and be a very strong operator, right? On the other side is more like what I'm doing, which is like you're shaping the whole strategy of the company. You're

  19. 7:07

    reinventing how we do things in terms of our productivity, but also in terms of the products and the strategy and the go-to-market. Uh, and finally, for coaching, it also depends on the kind of company. If you're in a company that's not really selling an AI product, you're spending a lot of time coaching inward. You're coaching your, uh, the different teams, the, the employees about how to use things. You want them to discover for themselves things like hallucination, because you can explain until you're blue in the face, but people don't believe it until they experience it.

  20. 7:38

    Um, and then, uh, as the company has more AI maturity, you're doing more coaching outward, right? So working with customers, working with the community, and, and things like that.

  21. 7:50

    So, uh, I also, uh, worked with Claude and Gemini to help me, like, analyze resumes of people in the role, right? And also job postings of people in the role and match them to these slider directions and see, like, what it thinks, and these are some of the areas it found. So this validates that, like, really it's the person. So, um, the row is the type of persona and their skill set, and then the columns are the sliders, right?

  22. 8:21

    Um, so I'm gonna give some examples from my own journey because this area's so fluid and new, so I think that's the, the most useful, I hope, thing to do. Uh, so after IBM Research, I joined a biotech, uh, unicorn in the Cambridge area that was working in agriculture. So they were using CRISPR for corn, soy, and wheat to make plants that make more food and use less water. But to do those experiments took ten years and a ton of land to validate, like, if your gene edit would work.

  23. 8:51

    So you needed methods to help the scientists make better hypothesis of what edits to make, right? So that was the way in the door for the AI and data part. Um, and then when I got there, they were like, "Oh, Rania, you are like a computer person." They are more-- They're like, they had amazing geneticists and amazing ag people, but not a lot of tech people from, like, engineering. So they're like, "We're also gonna give you IT, and please hire a CISO." And we had no data engineers, so, like, that

  24. 9:21

    mandate grew very quickly, very far beyond the "Let's build AI together." Um, but that company sold bags of seeds, right? So where in IBM I was building platform, here I was like, we, we end up, uh, to be a fully AWS shop. I bought Databricks, right? And then I spent my engineer's time building new algorithms for gene discovery and, um, moving from, uh, Box to Microsoft and, you know, things like that. The IT side, which,

  25. 9:51

    uh, was interesting, uh, but, uh, not my joy and passion. Um, so that was a very different experience and a very different skill set of what to do there. But also, the AI there was also fundamentally ch- uh, changing what the-- how the company operates and its ability to have great success, right?

  26. 10:14

    So if you go back to the sliders and so on, so I would say like at WSO2, which is the job I have now, I'm at about like twenty percent scientist, I wanna say sixty percent architect, twenty percent coach, right? Um, and these, the sliders below are also showing like where I'm at in each of the dimensions, right? So we have a small research team there that, uh, we've done some very interesting work. We've really worked to change the strategy of the company that's very focused now on the

  27. 10:44

    agentic enterprise fabric, and I spend a lot of time coaching mainly outward. We have a very tech-forward employee base. We're about seventy-five percent technical people, uh, on-- in the whole company, and people are super, super curious, right? It's the kind of place where if you're not curious, you probably won't stay for very long, right? Um, so then I don't have to do a lot of inward coaching. I do a lot of outward coaching. Um, in my previous role, though, and I was just mentioning, right, it was very different. So, uh, there, the

  28. 11:14

    point was not to-- We didn't need to invent new algorithm or to make new, uh, foundation models, right? The idea was how can we infuse some of the AI techniques that are well known? How can we gather... The data was a total mess, right? How can we clean and, uh, integrate the data? Um, and how do we, like, inject these things into the processes that they have? In some case, there was more invention for the gene discovery part, but in other places, it was just about basic operations. So for example, uh, the

  29. 11:43

    scientists had a hypothesis that if you measure the size of the embryo, of the corn embryo, that is an indicator of how likely... The size was an indicator of how likely you are for the next step to be successful in your gene editing. But it was too costly for humans to do it, right? So they said, "Oh, Rania, please, can we use AI?" And, um, I did my master's in computer vision, so I looked at that. I was like, "Well, yeah, sure, we can use AI, but you just need like blob detection. You don't need any machine learning, right? You just need basic computer vision." And we used a

  30. 12:13

    very simple algorithm, and it worked really well, right? And that helped. Um, and then in the other case for gene discovery, we did some very interesting with birds and, and things like this. Um,

  31. 12:27

    uh, so this is a bit like I was trying to put it a bit on a grid of how do we think about it. And really, in my view, with my experience having been like at IBM and at the biotech startup and now at WSO2, those are the dimensions I think about, right? Like, does the company sell software? Is the, is the population mainly technical? Um, and where are you in your AI journey?

  32. 12:52

    So, uh, I get asked a lot what I measure. Um, someone asked me to measure tokens because to see how much AI we do, and I said no. Um, because, right, it's so easily hackable. Like, uh, I'm not go- like, okay, it's easy to measure it, but I don't want to. Um, so they asked me, "What do you measure instead?" And I said, "Okay, these are the things I look at." AI fluency of the workforce. Like, is it only a few people that know AI in a center of excellence, and

  33. 13:22

    anytime anyone has to do anything, you have to get those people? Um, are there builders across the functions, right? Are there people who know how to do enough to get their job done and to really augment it that are, you know, in marketing, in different engineering teams, et cetera? Or again, are you holding all of those? So now I have a small central AI team that kind of works with everybody, but I have an AI lead in every single product, and every product team has folks working on the AI capabilities in it, right? Um, and then we have some products that are

  34. 13:52

    AI first, right? So everybody there is working on AI. Level of adoption, I think, matters. Like, are you just doing a simple task, cleaning an email, code completion, or are you changing an entire workflow for a bi- better outcome? Or like, we have a couple of our teams that have put agentic employees, right? So you have these agents that you can instantiate, and they work alongside the team, right? So that's a spectrum. And different teams are in different parts of the spectrum. Uh, tool availability, like have you as a company,

  35. 14:22

    do you-- have you subscribed to some tools, and are you reimbursing or paying the cost with team or enterprise accounts? Um, and then GEO visibility, so this is generative engine optimization, right? Can LLMs find us? Can they know what we do if someone searches? There's a lot going on there. We're still working, uh, on that, I think, with a lot of other people. It's not so straightforward.

  36. 14:48

    Um, and that's where also someone... It was interesting, someone was telling me that just yesterday, right? They're like, "The web has become for agents." Like, it's unreadable for humans anymore 'cause everything's being written assuming an LLM is reading it, and it's so frustrating. He's like, "So I'm just gonna have my LLMs read and summarize for me, and I'm only gonna talk to humans from now on," right? Um, for software products, uh, in the beginning, like when we, when I started in this role, it was about like what should we build, what should we extend, and where should we partner?

  37. 15:18

    Um, and then I-- we wanted all our products to be agent and LLM consumable. So the docs need to be LLM consumable. Uh, last year we added first-class support for agents, LLMs, and tools to all our products, and this year we're making sure every product can be used by agents, so everything needs to have an MCP server and skills and CLI, et cetera. Um, agent-proof pricing, so we've all heard this whole SaaS is dead, and if you price per seat, then whatever, what happens when the agents come and blow it out of the water, the consumption? So we

  38. 15:48

    are f- our pricing is all consumption-based. And then dogfooding our stack, though I heard another interesting thing today about that. Somebody told me like, "Oh, I'm at so and so company," which I won't name, "And they make us use our product. And it would be great except nobody takes any feedback, right, to make the product better." So hopefully we close the feedback loop and not only make people use our stuff, but they use it if they like it and if it helps them. And then the third dimension is the market and ecosystem. So AI thought leadership is not about like

  39. 16:18

    articles you can pay for, but do you have earned media, which is are you invited for talks? Do you, uh, have publications? Are you showing up in the press because you're doing something interesting for real, right? Uh, analyst recognition, customer adoption and ca- use cases is, I think, very, very important, right? Like, I stay up a lot thinking about what hurts for my customers and how we can make it better. Uh, we are a fully open source company, so everything we do is 100% open source. It's not open core.

  40. 16:49

    And, um, so for us also, that's a really important signal, right? Community participation and adoption and stars and forks. And then finally, ARR from AI products, right? Some of our AI pro- AI products are very new, so there isn't a lot of ARR, but some of these other things can give signal to it as we get off the ground. Um, and also I think, um, revenue's not the only number that matters. Like tokens is not the only number that matters. Um, so this is... And I think what you measure

  41. 17:19

    should change over time based on what you're doing and what your company is doing, right? So for me, this is what I'm measuring now. Once these things like reach maturity, I will change this list of things, right? Um, but think a lot about it because you really get what you measure. You start measuring something, everyone's gonna optimize for that. Um, so just a few words about WSO2. So, um, we're about 20 years old. We're about 150 million in ARR. Uh, our

  42. 17:49

    software powers, uh, a lot of capability in over 90 countries in six continents. Uh, our main products are, our history has been in API platforms, integration platforms, uh, identity and access management, and, uh, internal developer platform. We have a product for that. And in the last couple of years since I came, we've added agent identity and AI gateway to govern your, uh, AI interactions. We've added an agent

  43. 18:19

    builder to our integration platform. So that's- What we do, and everything we do is open source. And this is our whole portfolio today. So you'll see on the bottom the four platforms. This is what existed like, uh, some years back. And the way we started was saying, "We're gonna extend out into what AIs need," right? So LLM... AI APIs are APIs at the end of the day, but they need to be managed differently. So we put an AI gateway in the API platform. The identity platform, we already

  44. 18:48

    know how to do very robust identity and access managements for humans, so now let's do it for agents too. We added agent identity. This was all last year, and this year we've released an agent platform,

  45. 19:02

    um, that lets you use those things, but also lets you, uh, put it all together and manage the whole life cycle of these agents.

  46. 19:14

    So I'll give a couple examples. On the scientist side too, we have a small research group, like I mentioned. I'm very proud we have these, uh, three publications this year. Two of them are with undergrads in Sri Lanka, uh, that is their first publication ever, and one of them won a Best Paper Award. Um, on the architect side, right, the idea was AI is like great shiny object, but we wanna infuse it in the whole digital fabric. So how can we extend that with these capabilities, like I mentioned

  47. 19:44

    before? So those are the things that we've added, and Agent Manager is the, the newest we've done. We've just released it. Um, uh, in the interest of time, I won't step, but please feel free to explore the GitHub repo on the website.

  48. 20:00

    Um, so just to close in a few s- more seconds, the idea is, okay, there's no silver bullet. Depends on the company. You have to work very closely with others. I suggest if you try something like this, you have very strong backing and relationship with the CEO, because you're gonna have to work very closely with a lot of other parts of the company. And I've seen also some pr- pr- places where if it's a very AI-forward company, the Chief AI Officer, like the Chief Product Officer and the

  49. 20:30

    Chief AI Officer are one person, right? Or, um, in other places, that was surprising, in companies that are not software, I've also seen cases where the head of HR became the head of AI.

  50. 20:45

    I don't know how I feel about that. But yeah, I know. I'm like, I-- I'm okay. So it's just interesting things are happening. Everyone's trying to figure out what to do, right? Because they said, "Oh, agents are work- workforce. Are workforce, so we manage them. HR will manage them."

  51. 21:02

    I appreciate that, uh, like, uh, people feel like me in this room, because that room where I heard it, there was not the reaction. Um, but, uh, so I'll just leave you with this to close. Um, when I think about the... Even for me, like to take this role, I was trying to think, okay, um, you know, what I'm... Somebody had given me this advice, like, "Think about what are you good at and what do you love, what the world needs, and what you can be paid for, and try to find something at the intersection." So since this role is very fluid

  52. 21:32

    still, try to find, if you're interested in it and you're looking, you have a match somewhere, try to shape it in a way that it ha- you are at the center, and it makes you happy, and the things that you don't like, see if you can like have someone work on them, uh, differently or maybe a different company is a better fit that has a better alignment with your interests, with your love and your needs and what you're good at. All right. Thank you very much. If you have any

  53. 22:02

    questions, I'm around.