← All AI Engineer talks

AI Engineer World's Fair 2026

How Forward Deployed Engineering is done at Cognition

Read the talk

How Cognition Turns Coding Agents into Customer Outcomes

Forward deployed engineering connects agent capabilities to real delivery bottlenecks, then turns what happens in the field into better product decisions.

From a talk by Jia Wu

From benchmark excitement to practical usefulness

A coding agent can resolve benchmark tasks and still leave engineers wondering when they would actually use it. That was the gap around Devin at its 2024 launch: excitement about autonomous software engineering quickly met disappointment about practical usefulness. Jia Wu, a deployed engineering lead at Cognition, recalls a roughly 13% SWE-bench result at launch. That is a historical benchmark result, not a measure of current performance or enterprise productivity. Within a week, he remembers the reaction shifting from anxiety about engineers becoming obsolete to treating the agent as something to try when other ideas had run out.

Slide titled “Remember Devin?” with two comment excerpts questioning its usefulness and its 13% success rate.
“Remember Devin?” alongside two skeptical early reactions.

Cognition eventually incorporated that skepticism into its advertising, presenting the product as useful now with a deliberately self-deprecating campaign. But the deployment question remains more demanding than whether the agent can write code: how does its capability become something a customer can rely on? The product offers familiar entry points—a CLI comparable to Claude Code and an IDE interface comparable to Cursor or Windsurf. Those surfaces establish how an engineer interacts with the system; they do not, by themselves, explain how an organization gets value from it.

Wu came from the Windsurf side following Cognition’s acquisition of Windsurf. Alongside the CLI and IDE, he identifies Devin Cloud as Cognition’s best-known agent offering. The broader ambition is to make the agent part of an enterprise software engineering function, rather than simply another place to request code.

Wu reports that Cognition shipped almost an order of magnitude more PRs internally over the preceding six months while hiring lagged. He characterizes those PRs as robust and good quality, and describes rapidly growing enterprise adoption across different use cases. These are his reported observations; the talk does not establish a separate quality measurement or provide the underlying adoption data. They set up the operational question: what work makes that expansion possible?

0:150:26
Suggest correction

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

0:15 · section reference included

Find the bottleneck across the software lifecycle

Imagine two circles: one contains what a product can do; the other contains the problems customers need solved. Their intersection represents product-market fit. Forward deployed engineering at Cognition aims to enlarge that overlap. Doing so requires understanding the customer’s problem domain, not merely knowing the product’s features.

Two nearly overlapping circles labeled “FDE at Cognition,” with blue arrows pointing inward and “Product ∩ Problems” below.
FDE at Cognition brings products and problems into closer overlap.

For software engineering, the problem domain includes the entire life of an existing codebase. Features must be built, reviewed, deployed and maintained. Legacy software prevents most enterprises from treating development as a clean sequence of prompts that starts from nothing. Even a well-written user story only identifies something worth building; the organization still has to turn it into working software that creates business value.

Given sufficient context engineering, Wu regards generating the desired code blocks as largely solved. Wu estimates that writing code is usually only 20% of the problem. That is his framing of the work, not a universal measured allocation. Faster code generation leaves testing, review, deployment and maintenance to solve. An FDE therefore needs to locate the actual constraint in that chain before deciding where an agent belongs.

2:422:51
Suggest correction

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

2:42 · section reference included

Turn discovery into targeted automation

Deploying agents into a complex development lifecycle without a specific objective can produce consumption without useful delivery. Wu calls this token maximization: the system runs, tokens are spent, but no tangible outcome necessarily follows. The first deployment task is to map Devin’s capabilities to a customer problem important enough to justify the work.

Customer discovery and implementation are tightly connected. Wu describes a workday with four to five hours of customer calls followed by four to five hours at the keyboard. The calls identify strategic initiatives with the greatest business value. Implementation then turns the selected work into automations that can respond to alerts or events, without an FDE manually starting every agent run. The intended progression is:

  1. Identify a consequential business initiative with the customer.
  2. Find the software work that blocks it.
  3. Configure the agent to perform the relevant work.
  4. Connect recurring work to the events that should trigger it.

The goal is to make the workflow repeatable without requiring the deployed engineer to remain its operator.

That still leaves the harder question of return on investment, which Wu describes as ambiguous and unsolved. Embedding in the customer’s environment makes the candidate work concrete: a backlog of features, remediation tasks, code that never ships, tests nobody writes, or alerts that need triage. Mapping product capabilities to those needs is the first half of the job. Even a satisfied customer does not complete the whole responsibility.

5:035:20
Suggest correction

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

5:03 · section reference included

Bring field evidence back to the roadmap

The other half runs in the opposite direction: map customer problems back to the product. Solving an individual deployment moves one side of the product–problem overlap. Improving the product from that experience makes the next deployment easier and more valuable. Customer delivery and product feedback form one loop.

Wu describes field experience as a high-fidelity evaluation set. FDEs encounter the actual repositories, organizational constraints and failure cases that customers face every day. Their responsibility is to translate that context into product decisions, rather than forwarding every request unchanged. Three questions organize the translation:

  • Scope: Is this a recurring enterprise challenge or a need specific to one user?
  • Product potential: Should a workaround, hack or bug encountered during deployment lead to a supported feature?
  • Roadmap value: Would addressing it reduce uncertainty about what to build and why a customer would pay for it?

The purpose is to reduce roadmap risk by connecting engineering priorities to observed customer needs and revenue opportunities.

Slide describing field examples as an evaluation set, with three questions about enterprise challenges, turning workarounds into features, and de-risking the roadmap.
Mapping customer problems back to Devin’s capabilities informs the roadmap.

This feedback is not an administrative step after delivery. It is what allows a successful deployment to improve the product for subsequent customers. An FDE bridges both directions: applying what exists today, then helping determine what should exist next.

6:456:56
Suggest correction

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

6:45 · section reference included

Combine broad customer skills with deep judgment

That two-way responsibility explains why the FDE role is difficult to classify as sales engineering, solutions architecture or conventional software engineering. Cognition looks for a T-shaped skill profile: breadth across people, business, process, customers and technology, with a deep specialty that makes the person particularly useful in the field.

The deep specialty need not be identical for every hire:

  • Product judgment: Someone from product management may understand how features fit together and what makes a coherent product. In Wu’s view, falling implementation costs make deciding what to build more important.
  • Technical expertise: Founders and software engineers may bring substantial depth in a technology domain. Wu is willing to hire people whose business skills are still developing because becoming the technical expert in the room while already deployed is harder to teach on the job.

The shared requirement is enough breadth to operate with a customer, plus depth that contributes something difficult to replace.

Good deployed engineers can solve a customer problem and connect it to the roadmap. Wu distinguishes great ones by their curiosity about why the work matters. They ask whether the problem is important to the business and whether its lessons can improve the product for other customers. That curiosity sits alongside a second commitment: staying closely connected to the customer. Making customers successful is both the immediate deployment objective and the basis for a durable enterprise partnership.

8:248:30
Suggest correction

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

8:24 · section reference included

Measure delivery instead of consumption

Wu describes an earlier period of agent deployment in which token usage itself could serve as a KPI. Subsidized budgets made experimentation cheap, and running more work could look like progress. The next phase, which he calls intelligent orchestration, is accountable for measurable delivery. Large, regulated enterprises want to know whether the system produces value, not simply whether it is busy.

The distinction also changes the unit of improvement. Making one engineer faster is valuable, but it does not automatically accelerate an organization that includes both technical and nontechnical staff. Wu uses a tenfold improvement at each level as a challenge, not as an established organization-wide result. His criticism of isolated CLI and IDE tools is that they do not, on their own, coordinate the wider work needed to achieve that organizational change. The proof therefore has to move beyond individual tool activity.

10:2610:41
Suggest correction

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

10:26 · section reference included

Separate capacity, delivery time and output

Cognition calls an agent run, with its associated trace or trajectory, a session. Session metrics are used to estimate generated engineering hours and the portion considered productive. Wu reports that one three-month customer engagement generated capacity equivalent to more than 150 additional engineers. This is an inferred capacity equivalent, not a claim that the customer hired that many people.

An engineering-hours estimate can still resemble token maximization if it only repackages activity. Wu explicitly raises that objection before moving to delivery time. Wu reports approximately 82% shorter delivery timelines in an anonymized before-and-after deployment example. He describes looking at the customer’s existing project, ticket and sprint measures before Devin and after it is deployed and fully activated. The numerical claim is an 82% reduction; the accompanying order-of-magnitude language should not be treated as an equivalent calculation.

The third dimension is shipped output. Wu reports almost twice as many PRs in an anonymized comparison with engineers using point tools before Devin. This asks whether the additional activity becomes engineering artifacts, rather than merely more sessions.

These three proof points answer different questions:

MeasureWhat it asksWhat it does not establish alone
Estimated productive hoursHow much capacity did sessions generate?Whether projects finished sooner
Delivery timelineDid work reach completion sooner?Whether output quality improved
PR outputDid more changes get produced?Whether those changes created business value

Wu presents them as three anonymized case-study results, not one universal effect. The talk does not supply the calculation methods, sample sizes or causal controls needed to turn them into a general productivity estimate.

11:5012:00
Suggest correction

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

11:50 · section reference included

Apply the deployment model to legacy migrations

Migration work makes the enterprise problem concrete. Wu introduces Nubank as a public customer example involving an ETL migration. Wu recalls a Nubank migration staffed by 50 engineers finishing in roughly one-third of the timeline with Devin. He describes Devin’s contribution as autonomous, though he does not break down human prompting, supervision or review. The staffing and timeline figures remain his approximate recollection.

The next example concerns a separate large Latin American bank migrating a tax identification system. Wu reports completing the bank’s tax identification migration with roughly half the engineering effort. He connects the work to legacy environments such as COBOL and JCL, where expertise can be difficult to find. The displayed case-study slide includes an Itaú sign and describes COBOL migration outcomes; it is separate from the preceding Nubank example.

“Largest bank in Latin America” slide beside an Itaú sign, showing challenge, solution, and outcome rows plus hundreds of COBOL modules updated, 50%+ less engineering time, and millions of records updated.
Itaú case study: COBOL migration with 50%+ less engineering time required.

The relevance of these cases is not simply that an agent can generate an unfamiliar language. Enterprise deployment has to work inside complicated existing codebases and produce a migration that matters to the business. These are precisely the environments that the earlier greenfield prompting ideal leaves out.

14:1114:19
Suggest correction

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

14:11 · section reference included

Keep acceptance and engineering capacity distinct

Bilt supplies a different kind of example: ongoing engineering output rather than a bounded bank migration. Wu invokes an order-of-magnitude improvement while discussing merges and PR acceptance at Bilt, but does not define its baseline or denominator. That wording does not establish a precise acceptance-rate increase.

Wu reports weekly output at Bilt equivalent to the work of more than ten engineers. This is a separate capacity claim, not another way to express PR acceptance. He emphasizes the strength of Bilt’s existing engineers when making the comparison: the intended value is to extend a capable team’s output.

15:1315:23
Suggest correction

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

15:13 · section reference included

Make customer success a shared responsibility

The operating model depends on commitments that extend beyond embedding engineers and collecting feedback. Cognition applies its internal values to customer engagements as well. A successful deployment gives the people introducing Devin inside their organization visible results they can stand behind, turning them into internal champions.

Sometimes that commitment means physical proximity. Wu describes placing someone in Brazil for about two months to live near a customer and help the deployment succeed. Proximity is paired with a concern for correctness: engineering practices that need attention should be raised and brought back to product, without ego preventing the team from addressing them.

That makes the boundary between sales, post-sales and engineering less important than the shared responsibility for the customer’s outcome. Everyone contributes to bringing the product successfully into the market. Wu closes on urgency: the work sits at the intersection of difficult customer problems and software change at scale, and every second counts. The role is to keep that work moving—from a concrete customer need, through delivery, and back into a better product.

15:4115:53
Suggest correction

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

15:41 · section reference included

Resources

From the talk

Read the complete timestamped transcript
  1. 0:00

    [upbeat music] It's nice to be here. Uh, appreciate you all. My name is Jia.

  2. 0:15

    I'm a deployed engineering lead at Cognition, and today hopefully what you'll take away from this is that how we deploy Devin in the field is very much a function of how we view s- uh, deployed engineering at Cognition.

  3. 0:26

    So, how the forward deployed motion makes AI engineering actually real. Before I start, how many people, like, have heard of Devin or, like, know of Devin? Okay, cool. And I'm not talking about, like, the Devin of today, like, I'm talking about the Devin back in twenty twenty-four when we first released, and it was like, oh, SWE-bench thirteen

  4. 0:42

    percent. We're so, we're so back. And as engineers, we were like, "We're so cooked." But, I mean, after a week, everyone's like, oh, this is actually, like, not that useful.

  5. 0:50

    Um, I would only use this if I was desperate and out of ideas. [laughing] That's twenty twenty-four. Uh, and let it be said that we have a sense of humor because we took this and we ran with it.

  6. 1:00

    I'm sure you've seen all these ads around SF. We're actually good now. [laughs] So, the reason why we're good is... I'll talk a little bit about the product surface area a little bit, just to give you folks, uh, a little bit of context for who might not have used Devin before, uh, who might not have exposure to something

  7. 1:17

    like Cognition. So, if you've used Claude Code, we also expose a CLI. If you've used something like, you know, Cursor or Windsurf, we also expose an interface such as an IDE.

  8. 1:26

    Uh, actually, how many people, like, know of Windsurf or have used Windsurf in the past? Sweet.

  9. 1:33

    So I come over from the Windsurf side after the Windsurf acquisition. Um, great times. [laughs] And then what we're actually known for specifically is for Devin Cloud or the Devin Cloud agent.

  10. 1:44

    And I'm not gonna bore you to death talking about, like, all the components and features and everything that comprise of the actual product. I'm not here to sell you on that.

  11. 1:51

    What I am here to sell you on is we are one of the premier software engineering functions across the enterprise, and we're actually able to deliver impact on a global scale.

  12. 2:00

    What do I mean by that? We can take a pause and take a look at this figure. So internally at Cognition, over the last six months, for better or for worse, we might have been behind on hiring, but using our agent, we were able to ship almost an order of magnitude more good quality, robust PRs across the

  13. 2:17

    organization. So it's a step function increase in the amount of engineering leverage that we can have by deploying our own agent. You don't have to take our word for this.

  14. 2:25

    If we take a look-- If we can take a look at the specifics of how we're actually being consumed, how we're being utilized across the enterprise, it's a parabolic growth of how companies are adopting our agent, deploying our agent, and using it in multiple different use cases and multiple different scenarios.

  15. 2:42

    So what does that mean, right? Like, how does this actually happen? Well, it can only happen with the forward deployed engineers at Cognition. And I'm gonna frame up the problem from, like, a couple of, like, buckets, right?

  16. 2:51

    So there's two circles in front of you on the screen. One of them can represent the domain of a product, right? As a business, as a software engineering organization, obviously you have a product.

  17. 3:02

    You obviously also, on the other side, on the left-hand side, or right-hand side for you guys, you specifically have, like, a bucket of problems that you're looking to solve, right?

  18. 3:10

    You have a product, you have problems that you're trying to solve, and the intersection of these two, or whatever you would call it, is the product market fit, right?

  19. 3:18

    Hopefully, you have a pretty good overlap in the sense that whatever it is that your company does, you can actually bring value to customers. And hopefully whatever problems the customer has, you can solve with your company's stuff.

  20. 3:31

    So the forward deploying motion at Cognition essentially aims to maximize the overlap between the products that we typically build and the problems that we are experiencing across the enterprise.

  21. 3:42

    So what does that mean, right? The first fundamental concept that I would like to convey is that forward deployed engineers at Cog deeply understand the problem space at hand.

  22. 3:52

    And specifically, right, like if we think of the problem of software engineering, and I'm just gonna, like, mask the features at the bottom, we don't really care about those.

  23. 3:58

    But if we think about when you go ahead to take some sort of code base, some sort of implementation, and you need to, like, build features, you need to maintain that software, uh, you need to, like, review, deploy, maintain that software.

  24. 4:10

    All of these steps, all of these functions have a lot of business value behind them, right? You can only do-- Like, it would be great if we could build from zero to one and just, like, prompt stuff and not worry about, like, legacy code, but that's not the reality of the situation.

  25. 4:23

    It would be great if our product engineers or our product managers could just take user stories and say, like, "These are the things that we need to build in order to get value and revenue."

  26. 4:32

    And then we come to coding. Coding itself, at least from our perspective, is a mostly solved problem, right? These models are so good now that, like, with any type of context, with enough context engineering, you can get the code blocks that you really care about.

  27. 4:47

    But the problem isn't, like, writing code faster. That's usually only twenty percent of the problem. The problem really just becomes, like, how do you test this code? How do you review and deploy this code?

  28. 4:55

    And how do you maintain this code across the enterprise? So that's the premise of the problem. Now, I will predicate it by saying that, like, we also have the solution.

  29. 5:03

    I'm not gonna bore you to death about talking to you about the solution. But forward deployed engineers at Cognition, we map Devin's capabilities specifically to the customer problem. So if the software development life cycle is extremely complex, deploying the agents for-- with, like, no specific direction, you are straight up just token maxing, right?

  30. 5:20

    Like, you are wasting tokens. You are burning, you are burning spend. You're not getting any tangible outcomes. So we try to identify when we partner with customers, when we take meetings...

  31. 5:30

    And for example, right, like, my day might look like four or five hours of customer calls and then four or five hours of, like, actual hands-on keyboard work. Those four or five hours of calls actually allow us to understand very deeply what strategic initiatives are the highest leverage for the business, right?

  32. 5:45

    Once we've identified that, right, how can we automate ourselves out of the job in the sense that we set up the agent in a way that it runs all of the automations for us, right?

  33. 5:52

    We don't have to be there manually triggering the agents. It can respond to, like, specific alerts, specific events.

  34. 5:58

    But most importantly, as a forward deployed engineer, how do you measure the return on investment?

  35. 6:05

    And it's very ambiguous, and it's an unsolved problem because the company that will solve this will be, um, you know, five trillion dollars market cap. So specifically, our forward deployed engineers will embed in the customer's ecosystems, right?

  36. 6:17

    We take a look at, you know, the backlog of stuff that needs to be built. We take a look at the remediations that need to be done. We take a look at all of, like, the delayed code that never ships or the tests that nobody writes, uh, or the automatic triage of specific alerts, and we map our

  37. 6:30

    product capabilities into those problems. That being said, if we all do our job and we solve the customer's problems one hundred percent and the customer is very happy, that is only half of the s- equation, right?

  38. 6:45

    Not only do we have to solve the customer's problem, we also need to solve for our product. What do I mean by that, right? If we are taking a, a union of, like, the problems that the customers have and the products that we are building, right?

  39. 6:56

    Solving the problem only shifts, like, part of the Venn diagram. But in order to get that true feedback loop where we unify, like, the maximal overlap between what we're doing and what the customers need, that is forward deployed engineering at Cog.

  40. 7:08

    So the second part of this that I wanna emphasize is that at our company, we map the customer problems back to the capabilities at hand. Now, how do we do that, right?

  41. 7:18

    A lot of engineering challenges come in similar shapes, um, from the field, right? We have the highest fidelity evaluation set that comes back from our customers, right? We are in the field every single day.

  42. 7:30

    We are hearing about the c- problems, we are hearing about whatever the customers are doing, and we have to take that context and bring it back to product in a sensible way.

  43. 7:38

    So what are the ways in which these enterprise challenges, you know, manifest? Are they common across the entire enterprise or are they unique to a specific user? Should, like, workarounds or, like, hacks or bugs in th- in, in what we're building become features, right?

  44. 7:54

    Because ultimately what we want to do as a company is we want to de-risk our roadmap. At the end of the day, it would be great I- if, like, I as an engineer knew exactly what to build to get Y percentage of revenue from a particular customer and that's exactly what the problem is that we're trying to

  45. 8:10

    solve for because we are ultimately at the end of the day the heralds of the change, right? We are the bridge between products, we are the bridge between problems and the feedback is actually like half of the loop that makes the next deployment better than the previous deployment.

  46. 8:24

    So if we think about the T-shape or personas of the folks that we hire,

  47. 8:30

    and forward deployed engineering is just so... It's so flexible in terms of how you actually define it. Like, are you a sales engineer? Are you a solutions architect? What are you, right?

  48. 8:39

    So if you think about all of the skills that FDEs typically are expected to have, right, you probably wanna go wide. You probably wanna have, you know, good people skill, like, business skill, uh, good process, customer skill, or even technology, right?

  49. 8:51

    In order to be deployed in this space, you need to know, like, what- whatever the tech is. So we also look for very deep spikes across people, right? Folks at Cognition, uh, deployed engineers at Cognition, we will hire them from, like, product management backgrounds if they have a really good sense of, like, how products are supposed to

  50. 9:08

    fit into each other, right? Because if the s- cost of software engineering is going to zero, you actually need to know how to, like, design a product that makes sense 'cause you can just prompt it.

  51. 9:17

    But we also hire folks that are, like, founders, uh, software engineers, but specifically, like, very spiky in the technology domains, right? It's fine if you don't have, like, the strongest business sense.

  52. 9:27

    That can be learned, but it's also very hard to teach, like, technicality and being the expert in the room while you're on the job. So there's a couple pr- personas that we specifically hire for.

  53. 9:37

    Good customer engineers or deployed engineers do everything, right? Like, they can map the product back to the roadmap. Like, they can solve the customer's problems. Great customer engineers are able to actually have that relentless curiosity for why.

  54. 9:52

    So at Cognition we always ask ourselves, "Why are we solving this problem? Does this problem matter to the, to the business as a whole? And can I communicate this back to the roadmap in a way that, like, improves the problem for everybody else?"

  55. 10:05

    But we also are-- The second m- mantra that we subscribe to is that you have to be relentlessly tied into the customer, right? They are our lifeblood at the end of the day.

  56. 10:15

    Making them successful is the only way that you can survive as a business and become the obvious choice for an enterprise partnership. So these are the two mantras that we specifically subscribe to as, uh, deployed engineers at Cognition.

  57. 10:26

    So previously, um, [chuckles] the first approach to deployed engineering was just, you know, token maxing, right? Uh, the next era that I'll talk about is intelligent orchestration, but with, like, outcomes that you can actually measure and I'll give you guys some examples.

  58. 10:41

    So previously, like, a year, maybe a year and a half, two years ago, uh, the target or KPI for whatever deployed engineers were trying to do is maximize token usage, right?

  59. 10:53

    It was, it was like the perfect time. You didn't have to worry about budgets. Everything was subsidized. You could just, like, run anything you wanted. But now the problem has really shifted into the delivery space, right?

  60. 11:04

    A lot of organizations that we work with, some of the largest and most regulated enterprises in the world, they really care about are we getting true value out of this solution or are we just burning tokens for no reason, right?

  61. 11:17

    And that is one core differentiator that I need to call out between us and some of the other platforms. You can make engineers, like, ten X faster. That's fine.

  62. 11:24

    That's still valuable. But can you make an organization ten X faster, including every single person that might be technical or non-technical, uh, across the company? That's when you unlock the true value of being in the partnership and that's why, like, single point tools that are just like CLIs or just IDEs, they fail to do that.

  63. 11:42

    So let me just give you some proof points of how we've operated across the enterprise.

  64. 11:50

    So at Cognition, um, when we run the agent and the agent has, like, a specific trace or trajectory or, like, the agent does something, we call that a session.

  65. 12:00

    A session itself, right, we have metrics that allow you to derive how many engineering hours you can actually generate and how mu- how many engineering hours are actually productive that users are running.

  66. 12:10

    Right, so one of these examples is a case study where we embedded ourselves within a customer for three months. We brought them on board, and functionally, over the course of those three months, we delivered about 150 per-- like, plus headcount.

  67. 12:23

    So if you thought about, like, a project that you're trying to ship or something that you're trying to develop or a migration that you're trying to go through, imagine having 150 extra coworkers doing that with you by your side.

  68. 12:35

    You might just say, "Hey, this actually just kind of looks like token maxing," right? Like, you're just giving me a metric that says it's just, you know, engineering hours.

  69. 12:41

    You're, like, running a bunch of different sessions. Like, how do we know that these sessions are true, meaningful and valuable? So the second part of that is, okay, we can think about how we've reduced timelines for delivery projects and an order of magnitude, so about, like, eighty-two percent reduction across, like, delivery.

  70. 12:59

    So if you subscribe to the agile deliver-- the, the agile development methodology, obviously, like, you have tickets, you have sprints, like, you have things that need to be built.

  71. 13:06

    If you look at every single metric that you measure before you bring in Devin and after you bring in Devin, you can take a look at that. We can compress this timeline by a factor of, like, eighty-two percent.

  72. 13:17

    So across the board, whenever we get developed, whenever we get deployed and fully activated within the customer environment, not only do we deliver, uh, massive scale in terms of, like, engineering capacity, but we also reduce the time to value in terms of bringing things to market.

  73. 13:33

    Now, the third part of that is, hey, but I actually really care about the numbers, right? I actually really wanna see how many PRs are you actually shipping. Like, is this meaningful?

  74. 13:41

    Does this actually make sense? So if you think about s- dissecting the numbers a l-- like one dimension further, and you wanna just look at, like, the raw PRs that people are ripping across the enterprise, we deliver almost double the amount of PRs that engineers were able to do with single point tools and before you brought in

  75. 13:58

    an agent harness like Devin. So there's three proof points of anonymized case studies in which we are able to deliver value at scale and across, like, various different problem domains.

  76. 14:11

    What I'll say is these aren't, like, you know, private case studies. We have a bunch of different public case studies as well. So we partner with companies like Nubank, right?

  77. 14:19

    If you folks have ever gone to Latin America, uh, you can understand that, you know, the-- there's a lot of developers there. There's a lot of projects that are tangentially related.

  78. 14:27

    So specifically, like, we can say that there was an ETL migration. They had fifty engineers staffing this migration. We were able to deliver this within, um, I think, like, one-third of the timeline

  79. 14:38

    just with Devin autonomously. We have another bank, right? We have another use case where we work with one of the largest banks in Latin America. They were trying to migrate, like, the tax identification system.

  80. 14:49

    I know, like rocket science, right? Um, but the idea is that we were able to deliver this with half of the amount of effort actually required. So if you think about, like, legacy languages like COBOL, if you think about things like JCLs, you think about things like, like people don't learn anymore just because it's, like, not fun

  81. 15:04

    and not interesting, we're able to operate across some of the most complicated code bases in the world and deliver results that actually matter.

  82. 15:13

    And the last but not least, obviously, like, if we think about the Built card, um, specifically, we're able to actually merge, like, an order of magnitude more, um, in terms of, like, PR acceptance rate.

  83. 15:23

    We deliver, like, ten X person-- like, worth of engineering talent, like, every single week. And then we're actually able to, you know, generate the weekly output of, like, over ten engineers at the organization.

  84. 15:32

    Built has great engineers, by the way, right? These guys are so cracked. So if you take one of these engineers and multiply them by ten, you just imagine the amount of returns.

  85. 15:41

    So what I'll say is I'll, I'll probably, like, round off this talk by just saying that at Cognition, we don't just, you know, embed ourselves in the customers. We don't just, you know, propagate feedback back to everybody else.

  86. 15:53

    But the core values of the company are things and principles that we subscribe to, not internally to the company, but external to the company as well, right? It's really fun being on the winning team.

  87. 16:02

    It's really fun when you come into an organization and say, "We can actually deliver so much cool stuff," and, like, make people our champions, right? Whoever deploys Devin within the organization, they can show results that are essentially unmatched across the board.

  88. 16:16

    And we go for it all, right? We leave nothing on the table. We've deployed somebody in Brazil for, like, two months [laughs]

  89. 16:24

    to, to live next to one of the customers to just make them successful. So we're down for the mission, and it's, it's more about, like, correctness, right? Like, if, if there are engineering practices that we wanna fix, if there are things that we wanna flag and raise, like, these are all things that we take back to product,

  90. 16:38

    and there's no ego involved. At the end of the day, we are all in the same boat, we're on the same mission, and we're just shipping.

  91. 16:45

    And everybody essentially is go-to-market. I know forward deployed engineering is kinda like this fuzzy thing where it's like, "Am I part of sales? Am I part of post-sales? Like, what do I actually do as an FDE?"

  92. 16:53

    But everybody is go-to-market because the target is to make the customer successful at all costs.

  93. 16:59

    And at the end of the day, we just do things because every second counts. So if you're interested in, you know, forward deployed engineering at Cognition, being the intersection between some of the hardest problems in this world, being part of, like, all of the software disruption at scale, and then being on the other side of these problems,

  94. 17:17

    we should talk. Thank you. [audience applauding] [upbeat music]