DATAVENTURES . ED Report 15 August 2018 Summary: The last month has been a focus on getting ventures who have taken longer in their MVP stage than expected into a Go/No Go state. It?s been our biggest learnings that these MVP which involve partners puts a big strain on our ability to meet deadlines. This is the nature of any type of "startup", where your pace outways the market. However, the cadance to keep this going is hard on the team, and we?ve had to pull back some of the checklist we defined and get to some core questions: 0 Do we still have a unique value proposition? 0 What partners are required to bring this venture to the market? 0 What involvement is required of Stats NZ 0 How long will it take for the product will enter the market with paying customer(s)? How much investment is required to get that product into the market? This is being planned for next Thursday (23 August), where myself, Hollie and a commercial SME will test the ventures and Venture Managers to get a Go/No Go on if this is viable. If viable still, then we will be using the next board meeting as an opportunity for them to pitch and take the venture to Product in Market (field 3), and requiring additional funds to enable this which the board will sign off on. If not, they will be packaged up and released to the public. Another theme that has come up in past board meetings is asking what partners are involved. Hollie and Lou Draper (from PR/Comms partner Draper Cormack) are running two events that will highlight the Data Ventures call-to-action to attract more partners and build awareness for anyone that may want to work with us. 1) Based on a successful approach I used at ACC, starting 30th August, we will be running a 4 ½ week “procurement” type process where we present to a group of interested partners about DV and the ventures we’re focusing on. This will be streamed, and recorded for people who are unable to attend in person. From there we ask them to register their interest on what ventures interest them. 2) A co-design workshop with (ideally) three public, three private and six business representatives to get together to develop (or even destroy) our MOU between Data Ventures and private organisation partners. The effort here is to show we have consulted with the private sector beyond our own experiences to refine what the R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t expectations are of a joint venture with Data Ventures, and help smooth out working with partners in this new approach to business for Stats NZ. The outcome of these two events is we will build a bucket of partners who have expressed interest, and will keep them engaged with a stakeholder comms plan. We may decide to repeat these events regularly. KPI’s: ● ● ● ● ● ● ● Products in Market: 0 MVP/Proof of Concepts: 6 (7) Stats NZ people involved with DV: 13 Processes operationalised in Stats NZ: 1 Target date for first revenue: September 2018 Revenue generated: $0 of $600,000 9(2)(b)(ii), 9(2)(j) The good: ● The focus shift towards getting a Go/No Go has created a good pressure of what is required to keep ventures moving through the fields and gates. The bad: ● We lost Aimee which left a gap in capability, that put extra pressure on Hollie and I meaning we have been able to keep the quality of work up. ● People have been raising concerns around impact to Maori and relations with Stats NZ around what Data Ventures is doing. The ugly: ● 9(2)(a) Next steps/goals: ● 22nd August we have our Go/No Go event to do our internal health check on ventures. The result of this could be one or more ventures is put to pasture, and other validated opportunities will need to be pursued. 30th August our “Working with Data Ventures” event ● 6th September our “Co-design public and private working together” event ● Discover if there’s any ventures in the maori/iwi space to help a leviate concerns R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t ● coming from that area. DATAVENTURES . ED Report 19 September 2018 Summary: One word: reflection. The last month has been run a bit like an accelerator. Why? Because we needed to know if any of these ventures were actually as viable as they say, and were the ways we were looking to build the business models the right way, heck is even Data Ventures focusing on the right things? These are the key things to note over the last month which we used to test these points, GolNo-go Event - 23rd August An event was run where Venture Managers present their ventures' current state to a panel of 10 people. The panel then pushed and pulled the assumptions and facts of each venture to see how viable they were. Intended outcome was to get a good position of each of the ventures and if any of them need to be halted. The ones that continue are to then pitch to the board and take them to Field 3 (product in market). What came from this event was a confidence in the direction of two of the ventures: Rob?s travel pattern venture and Neriah?s available cash balance venture. Jamie?s aerial imagery surveying venture had ended up focusing on two individual products due to the wide range of opportunities, and with new direction, is now focusing on one product which aligns the best with the strategic focus and priorities of Data Ventures. The event also highlighted which areas the ventures need to work on. There was more work needed around market validation before bringing them to the board. Working with Data Ventures event - 30th August We invited potential partners to spend part of an evening with us. They were shown the ventures we are focusing on. Many approached us afterwards with opportunities to work R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t with us using Stats NZ IP. This was run as a leaner procurement approach, so if needed, we could use this to select partners to build things if ever required in the traditional vendor/client relationship. Intended outcome is to validate if partners were really wi ling to work with us. You can read more about how the event here (including metrics of engagement): https://medium.com/data-ventures/an-evening-with-data-ventures-849427fd2c8d To summarise, the points of interest f om the evening are: ● ● 179 people registered to attend in person or via stream We went an email to all people who registered for the event, with 80% opening the email and 50% of them clicking links (to the slides or the recorded stream). The email asked people to register interest in one or more ventures, and then to meet with us individually ● 40 organisations registered for interest in one or more ventures, or unrelated to our ventures (usually something they are working on) and how they could work with us. This has blown away our expectations of about 20-30 people at the event, and then maybe a couple of organisations wanting to partner with us. Joint Venture co-design - 13th September And finally, we brought together a group of six lawyers and commercial people across public and private to help us test the joint venture model. Particularly for them to bring their experiences and help shape what was needed in terms of setting expectations early on to allow them to be a success. Intended outcome is to fashion out the best way to set the expectations between parties in a joint venture, particularly when it’s focusing on private and public working together. This event was meant to happen a week earlier, but due to unavailability we had to settle on the 13th September. The outcome of this one was very different from what we had in mind. What I thought was going to be an evening of refining our engagement principles for a joint venture, and maybe at worst having to re-name from an Memorandum of Understanding to something R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t else, ended up being a deconstruction of why we were doing joint ventures in the first place. Even with context, background, examples of business models, the room turned against the challenges we’re facing for ourselves by things having to be joint ventures. To summarise, what we’re doing is already hard (setting up a commercial arm in a government agency without setting up a CRI/SOE/etc.), and using joint ventures as a way to mitigate some of the challenges around competing in the market was adding a large element of complexity and risk. The overall suggestion was to let each venture define what the best business model was, and then use whatever the legal constructs are best for that model. They could be a joint venture in some cases, but most likely not. What now? There are a lot of spinning plates right now from these three major tests on how Data Ventures is approaching things, and it made me reflect on why we were doing these and how we got to where we are today, and if it’s the best it can be. I have also been having discussions early with people like Margaret Delaney (CFO Stats NZ) and Emmett Geoghegan (Chief Counsel Stats NZ) discussing “what if’s” around any potential changes Data Ventures could make and what the impacts might be. 9(2)(g)(i), 9(2)(a) In our next board meeting, the topic for the deep dive is “reflection”. A chance to look back on the last 10 months, the decisions along the way, the events that have happened, the learnings along the way and present a few options for what I think is the Best Thing™ for Data Ventures going forward. This is also good timing with Amanda joining the board. R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t 9(2)(a), 9(2)(g)(i) The good: People want to work with us, and it’s not just a niche. ● The awareness I have to raise this now before it’s too late ● The bad: I have noticed I have been in the weeds” a ot lately, and only recent reflection on ● this being why I felt I was running th n The ugly: ● 9(2)(a), 9(2)(g)(i) KPI’s: Products in Market: 0 MVP/Proof of Concepts: 6 (7) Stats NZ people involved with DV: 13 ● Processes operationalised in Stats NZ: 1 ● Target date for first revenue: September 2018 ● Revenue generated: $0 of $600,000 ● ● ● ● 9(2)(j), 9(2)(b)(ii) Next steps/goals: To get a decision on the direction of Data Ventures, and then put in play any of the good/bad actions that are needed to steer in this new direction. R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t ● DATAVENTURES . ED Report 17 October 2018 Summary: The question on everyone's mind will be; what?s happened since the direction was confirmed after the interim board meeting. The week prior to the interim board meeting has been about getting an idea of where the team wanted to sit with the move away from the roles of Venture Manager and into the new team structure around Sales, Business Development, Operations and Product Manager. The week after was a focus of getting feedback from the team, to take notes on concerns, issues and suggestions. It felt very unsettling for everyone, including myself having a team that I knew was hardly even thinking beyond the next day. Ending that week, I had 1:1 meetings on the Friday to confirm if theyre on board with the direction change, and if not, tell me the concerns why. This included what role they feel was right for them in the new team setup. This helped me form a good sentiment across the team for Monday and before the weekend. Monday, we sat down together for most of the day, covering off "why are we doing this?? to help address some of the concerns raised in the previous week. After that, we confirmed the roles that people are now looking to settle into: Director: Me Operations: Hollie Sales: Neriah Business Development: Rob Product Manager: Jamie To help set clarity of what each persons new roles are, we got everyone to write three responsibilities people believe that person has. We ended up with 15 per role, with a lot of them grouped into about 5-6 once we found common themes. After that I asked each person to note the KPI’s they see themselves being measured against. I will be taking these and formalising them into new position descriptions. End of Monday, I checked with each of the team to see how they feel with the roles R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t confirmed, responsibilities detailed and KPI’s noted. A few comments around they are needing to wait and see how the team will settle in, but all in all positive. The weeks tasks are set, the goals of month are noted, the team is back in actions. The good: ● We’ve been able to get everyone into a new role, while managing some crossed expectations on what role people in the team initially wanted. The bad: ● It’s slowed progress fo a few weeks. The ugly: ● KPI’s: ● The new roles means people need to settle in again, and that can take some time. To be discussed, with the change of direction. Next steps/goals: ● By next board meeting, we would like to report on progress of first sale, how the product build is going, and what the situation is with the data providers for population density and initial travel pattern product offerings. DATAVENTURES . ED Report 23 November 2018 Summary: We have started on an initiative to create a paid pilot for up to six months (collateral attached). This allows for a handful of customers across Government and government- owned organisations to get access to the real data and for us to build the appropriate commercials with the ongoing data supply from the data-providers. We have put the pilot together and sent out the emails of interest to "hot leads?. We have received feedback on pricing so we are working on a sales strategy. We took part in the Better for Business All of Government showcase. We spoke to a number of people from both public and private organisations. We were challenged on making money - we explained that there were organisations who would not hand over data unless there was money involved; we also explained that the cost we would be charging would be less than if organisations did it themselves. These responses provided satisfactory which gives us a solid answer if this continues to come up. The upshot of taking part was some leads but it was mainly a benefit from an awareness perspective. There was a lot of feedback from people asking why they hadn?t heard of us before, reinforcing that we need to promote ourselves. We have discussed this with Draper Cormack Group who have encouraged us to do more front?facing work when we have signed contracts with the telecommunication companies so we have something to point to. We were disappointed there were no government Ministers or media like we expected but we still thought it was a endeavour. ?This brought to an end the team restructure with all roles confirmed and we are working through the process of hiring three new roles: ● Lead dev ● Dev ● Front-end designer We are also sourcing resource from Stats NZ for support of SME and around modelling data. 9(2)(b)(ii) R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t Refer to appendix Note 1 I met with Nick Gerritsen and Dr Steve Meller around the GovtTech innovation fund across multiple countries and how Stats is relevant as the lead agency. I also talked with Ian Cope from ONS. We validated our approach and how we are further ahead than some countries in bringing mobile data together. I caught up with Rhonda Paku. We discussed the impact that this could have on iwi and Maori organisations and communities. We discussed how as well as the privacy impact assessment, there could be the development of a cultural awareness assessment. The result is that Rhonda is discovering what type of light-framework we can put in place for when people bring our datasets together with their own to raise awareness. We met with Office of the Privacy Commissioner. We discussed our initiatives, focusing on population density. We prepared ourselves with a Q&A, with questions sourced from news articles and blogs from around the world around the concerns and questions they had with these types of initiatives. We talked through those concerns. OPC was very happy with this and wanted us to go for the tick of privacy. They said it was “a good showcase of big data R O e ffi le ci as al e In d u fo n rm de at r t io he n Ac t and privacy.” They saw this as a good opportunity for the telcos to show what was done with customer data, and how it was handled responsibly. The good: ● Being in a position where we can confidently take the nex steps on a paid pilot. The bad: ● Some of the feedback on pricing on the pilot was not as positive as we’d hoped. The ugly: ● We were happy with the last month and don’t believe there was something that fits “ugly”. This new focus means we can foresee and expect some of the roadblocks and plan for them KPI’s: ● To be discussed with the change of direction. Next steps/goals: ● Hire the three key roles that will help us with the product build. ● Have a mature pipeline ● Have new KPIs reflecting our focus. ○ Sales ○ State of data providers ○ State of product/roadmap ○ Financials DATA VE NTURES Population density pilot DATAVENTURES . The pilot Together we will prove: a the details ofthe commercial viability of a population density product and the data a the quality of population density data inferred from location estimates and Stats NZ population expertise the high value use cases We recommend up to a 6 month pilot to prove the initial model, followed by further iterations of the product and product road map informed by the learnings. DATAVENTURES . What the pilot will answer? We will have worked with you to create a business case that adds value to your organisation. It will have answered what is the monetary value of this product. For government, it?s about making better decisions for Aotearoa NZ. For others, it?s about learning about their community and optimising and growing revenue. For all, it?s about creating clear public benefit in doing this. DATAVENTURES . Overthe last three months 12 government organisations Who has have provided validation and testing towards the bee product being provided in this pilot. involved This pilot is the next step in developing a viable product offering that will delivervalue to the customers in that so fa r? group, DATAVENTURES . What are the benefits of the pilot? Access to data at a level offrequency and resolution that is better than anything available on the market The expertise of Stats NZ that improves the quality ofthe data so you don?t have to. Any privacy and confidentiality risks are managed by Stats NZ expertise and reviewed by the Office of the Privacy Commissioner Simplifyingthe government procurement process DATAVENTURES . We will agree on success criteria for a pilot, and we expect them to be themed around: What does 0 You develop at least one valuable workflow to SU incorporate the data provided by us in the pilot look like? 0 We reduce your costs relating to the acquisition and processing/handling ofdata DATAVENTURES . What IS the com Itme nt from you? 0 People from your legal, data/insights, financial and executive . areas that will be appropriate for weekly progress meetings, on-going agreement discussions, and authority to make appropriate decisions. We are expecting this will require up to 40 hours a month oftime across these areas of your organisation. DATAVENTURES . What to Within 6 months we will have made a seamless transition from testin viabilit ofthe roduct toa live expectat product in use by your organisation. e