Forrester

After the stock market and hopes of consumer electronics companies such as Apple were buoyed by news of a tariff reprieve on consumer electronics on Friday, they were rapidly dashed by reports that no such exception was in the offing. Instead, these categories were moved to a different “bucket.” Businesses thrive on stability because they plan around rules of engagement — plans that entail commitments of significant time, resources, and capital expenditure. Ergo, markets perform better when businesses are confident that the rules are really the rules. When Friday’s policies are thrown out with Sunday’s brunch leftovers, companies will resort to one primary strategy: Do as little as possible and thereby do no harm. This is exactly what we recommend in our report, Consumer Marketing, CX, And Digital Leaders: How To Thrive Through Volatility (US): Times of extreme volatility often spawn organizationwide crises of “Everything must change, all at once” — a narrative that is both false and dangerous. Instead, keep a cool head, resist knee-jerk reactions, and fine-tune strategies precisely and creatively to adapt to only the meaningful and substantial changes in the market and business environment. What does Apple do on Monday now that Friday’s rules don’t apply? Here’s what I predict: Lobby the US administration hard and keep hopes alive for an exemption, for itself or the category. It’s been a successful route in the past and is really the best option in this tariff regime. Stay put and reduce risk, avoiding significant changes and accumulating inventory, as the company has been doing, to serve as an insurance policy (and if Apple doesn’t need to use it, that’s even better). Continue business-as-usual supply chain diversification, mostly independent of the current tariff volatility. The company has been moving production to countries such as India and Vietnam well before this administration; it can incorporate options to expedite this if the tariffs remain. Have Plan B pricing that looks at different price elasticities by product line. Come up with the right price points and offers (such as trade-in) that do not jeopardize upgrade cycles into more expensive phones and the adoption of the lucrative Apple ecosystem. Manage the China relationship, because the country matters not just as a supply source but as a market that is already under threat and can be a source of significant revenue pain. The trade war has added strain to the relationship, but Apple has to work hard to avoid blowback. To better manage your brand and business through this period of uncertainty and shifting consumer behaviors, please read our report, Consumer Marketing, CX, And Digital Leaders: How To Thrive Through Volatility (US). If you are a Forrester client, stay tuned for additional research on how CMOs can better manage uncertainty and volatility. Go to my Forrester bio and click “Follow” to be notified. Also, as a client, you can schedule time with me for an inquiry or guidance session or talk to your account team about workshops and strategy days on planning through uncertainty. source

The US administration is convinced that Apple, one the biggest and most valuable brands in the world, can and should move its manufacturing infrastructure to the US. The reality, however, is far murkier. Let’s dissect what puts Apple in a precarious situation and how it might hope to manage through this volatility. Apple is in the spotlight — and in a tough spot. Apple is one of the few major tech companies with a significant hardware business, making it much more exposed to the tariff situation. As a marquee brand, and one of the most valuable in the world, Apple is often referenced by the administration. What it does — or chooses not to do — is always under scrutiny. Although Apple has long been following a “de-risk China” strategy, moving production out of that country and diversifying to India and Vietnam, the bulk of its supply is still tied to China, which faces ever-escalating tariffs. Unfortunately, this is also a double whammy for Apple because, as tensions escalate with China, it jeopardizes one of its major markets for iPhones, where it’s already struggled to grow in the face of fierce competition. Apple has wiggle room. As a company with lucrative margins on its devices, Apple can absorb some of the tariff-induced cost increases without significant financial impact, at least in the short term. In addition, its services business, which is even more profitable than its devices, can provide an additional buffer to the margin impact. Apple is also uniquely positioned to pass on a reasonable chunk of the price increase because it has built a price moat around itself with exceptional brand equity and customer experience. The brand commands better loyalty than its competitors, and it is unlikely that a manageable price increase will send these customers fleeing into the arms of Android-based competitors. Apple’s best bet is to hedge. Apple has announced plans to invest $500 billion in the US over the next four years, but I predict that it will rather adopt a wait-and-watch approach, hedging bets and saying more while doing less. The primary reason for this is the extreme volatility surrounding these policies. If the tariffs prove to be merely negotiating tactics, then they could be temporary. Even if that were not true, given how far this trade policy is from historical precedent (irrespective of the party in power), it is highly likely that it will be reversed in the future. Making comprehensive changes to the manufacturing footprint is difficult, expensive, and time-consuming; undoing those changes would be just as challenging. In such a volatile environment, Apple will be loath to take drastic action that is hard to do and harder still to undo. —– To better manage your brand and business through this period of uncertainty and shifting consumer behaviors, please read our report, Consumer Marketing, CX, And Digital Leaders: How To Thrive Through Volatility (US). If you are a Forrester client, stay tuned for additional research on how CMOs can better manage uncertainty and volatility. Go to my Forrester bio and click “Follow” to be notified. Also, as a client, you can schedule time with me for an inquiry or guidance session, or talk to your account team about workshops and strategy days on planning through uncertainty. source

Last year, Verizon made the curious choice to acquire once-bankrupt Frontier Communications for $20 billion. Cited as a key benefit to Verizon (beyond the landgrab) was a “high-quality customer base.” High-value customers are not difficult to find, but contact centers struggle to engage them for net-positive outcomes. Updating infrastructure wasn’t enough to turn around Frontier; contact center employees were enabled and empowered to solve customer problems and grow the relationship. When I recently spoke with Verizon Consumer Group Chief Customer Experience Officer Brian Higgins, it was clear that his company’s strategy and Frontier’s align. He similarly invested in contact center employees and attributed success to a foundation of psychological safety and a concerted effort to cocreate new tools with employees. Aside from two companies with profitable contact centers coming together, the 2026 acquisition will have the added benefit of cultural synergies, as both demonstrate value for the employee experience (EX) as a key enabler of the customer experience (CX). Psychological safety and cocreation are necessary components of your EX strategy to successfully implement your CX strategy. Many leaders claim that psychological safety exists but don’t measure it. At Forrester, we use several questions to gauge this outcome in our global Future Of Work Survey, as it is a complex outcome of multiple actions and emotions. Furthermore, cocreation must be programmed into the organization, likely as part of a broader discipline such as design thinking. With the intention to take measurable, disciplined action, firms that have an EX-to-CX strategy: Begin with a foundation of psychological safety. In the case of Verizon, employees were willing to share unmet needs so that the building of solutions started by addressing the right problems. In environments with high psychological safety, listening leads to a concerted effort to improve the employee experience — not just customer outcomes. Cocreate solutions with employees. There are many solutions on the market to help your customer-facing employees recognize a high-value customer, understand the context of the conversation, and know the appropriate products and services to offer, but none of these are “turnkey” products. Bring employees in early and often to shape solutions to their ways of working and to get buy-in for eventual adoption. No, psychological safety and cocreation are not new concepts for most leaders. But have you outlined how you will connect these two concepts between your EX strategy and your CX strategy? This connection must be made explicit in your CX vision. The goal: Align all CX stakeholders on how employees will play the most important role in the customer experience. Consistency, in everything from how change is communicated to how customer focus is recognized, builds psychological safety as well as CX quality. This is so important to your success that we’ve outlined what leaders must do (and how to do it) in a recent Forrester report, Build Your EX-To-CX Strategy Now. Not a Forrester client? You can listen to the authors of that report discuss findings in a recent CX Cast episode. And you can join me at CX Summit North America in Nashville this June, where I will be sharing more insight on the topic. Learn more and register. source

I’m excited to announce the release of The Forrester Wave™: Data Management For Analytics Platforms, Q2 2025. This edition evaluated the 11 most significant data management and analytics (DMA) platform vendors, providing a comprehensive view of a market undergoing rapid transformation. Over the past decade, we’ve consistently published the DMA Wave, tracking the evolution of the space and offering guidance to enterprises navigating their data strategy, but this year’s evaluation reflects a notable shift. Historically, most DMA solutions were optimized for structured data and near-real-time processing and often tied to a single cloud with limited data sources. Today, the demands on DMA platforms are much broader and more complex. What’s Going On With The DMA Platforms Market? With the rise of multicloud and hybrid-cloud data strategies, diverse data types, and increasing expectations for improved scale and automation, we tailored our criteria to reflect these emerging requirements. This year’s Wave captures how vendors are adapting with new and advanced capabilities fueled by advanced automation, integrated data intelligence, and AI-driven data management. Generative AI is emerging as a transformative force, enhancing both automation and intelligence within DMA. As a result, selecting the right DMA platform provider to support immediate and long-term data strategies has become increasingly complex. There are two important takeaways from the research: Generative AI is automating DMA functions. The modern DMA platform is automating complex tasks such as data ingestion, cleansing, transformation, integration, governance, and security. Natural language allows users to interact with data, generate insights, and manage platforms without deep technical expertise. This significantly reduces the need for specialized engineers and streamlines operations. GenAI also enhances DMA with advanced features such as anomaly detection and support for vector-based search. Leading vendors leverage agentic AI and natural language capabilities to deliver more intelligent and integrated data management. Built-in data intelligence is elevating DMA to a new level. Built-in data intelligence is streamlining data semantic-related tasks, dramatically improving efficiency and unlocking deeper insights. These capabilities can automatically detect patterns, relationships, and trends within datasets that normally take significant time and effort to uncover. Leading vendors deliver comprehensive, automated intelligence that enables rich data contextualization, accelerating a wide range of use cases. This empowers organizations to act proactively — whether predicting customer behavior, optimizing operations, or mitigating risks such as fraud. New Wave Criteria Reflect Evolving DMA Requirements With generative AI and data intelligence becoming foundational to modern DMA platforms, vendors increasingly embed these capabilities — although vendor offerings range from basic to highly advanced, integrated solutions. The key differentiator is not simply the presence of genAI but how deeply and effectively it is integrated. We evaluated genAI as a standalone criteria and as an embedded capability across core functions such as data ingestion, transformation, governance, security, and integration to capture this evolution. We also emphasized natural language for data access and end-to-end platform management through conversational interaction. This holistic approach ensures that our evaluation reflects the rising demand for intelligent, intuitive, and highly automated data management solutions. If your organization still relies on traditional data management tools for analytical workloads, now is the time to shift to a modern DMA platform. Modern platforms powered by genAI, advanced automation, and intelligence enable the real-time delivery of consistent and trusted data. This transformation accelerates high-impact use cases, fuels innovation and growth, and rapidly democratizes data access across teams. Upgrading your DMA platform isn’t just a technology upgrade; it’s a strategic move toward becoming a data-driven, AI-enabled organization. Don’t wait — embrace genAI-powered DMA platforms to stay ahead of the curve. For more insights, book time with me via an inquiry or guidance session. source

The US Federal Trade Commission sees Meta in court, starting tomorrow. It’s the culmination of a nearly six-year investigation on whether Meta has a monopoly on the personal social networking market or not. The FTC argues that by acquiring Instagram (2012) and WhatsApp (2014) it “enabled Facebook to sustain its dominance—to the detriment of competition and users—not by competing on the merits, but by avoiding competition.” Meta argues the FTC’s case is “weak” and “ignores reality.” The company asserts, “The evidence at trial will show what every 17-year-old in the world knows: Instagram competes with TikTok (and YouTube and X and many other apps).” 54% Of Poll Respondents Think Meta Has A Monopoly On Social Media* We ran an overnight “quick pulse-check” poll in Forrester’s ConsumerVoices Market Research Online Community. We asked them to react to the potential forced split up of Meta. About 500 online adults across the US, UK, and Canada responded. The results show ambivalence and agreement: 54% agree that Meta has a monopoly on the personal social networking market. (27% are neutral and 19% disagree) 43% agree that Instagram spinning off into a separate company (separate from Meta) would be GOOD (50% are neutral and just 7% disagree) 45% agree that WhatsApp spinning off into a separate company (separate from Meta) would be GOOD (50% are neutral and just 5% disagree) *Note: This poll was administered to a random sample of 497 online consumers in the US, UK, and Canada in Forrester’s qualitative ConsumerVoices online community. This data is not weighted to be representative of total country populations. Our analysis of respondents’ open-ended statements found four common themes (below)— each with just one illustrative verbatim (of many): Meta has too much power: “No company should have all that power and user data.” Users are concerned about data privacy: “Not so easy to track behaviour if on different platforms.” Some see an opportunity for innovation: “I think it allows it to grow and advance without the parent coming choosing what it does.” People want marketplace competition: “Meta having a monopoly on 3 popular social media apps prevents competition and better oversight of these apps.” Meta Has A Trust Problem. It’s Not New. When Meta was just Facebook, the company suffered from trust issues. The 2018 Cambridge Analytica scandal created mainstream awareness of consumer data privacy issues—tarnishing Facebook’s already shaky reputation. And when the company rebranded as “Meta” in late 2021, Forrester found (back then) that 75% of poll respondents disagreed that a new company name would increase their trust in Facebook. It hasn’t. And that brings us back to present day. According to Forrester’s February 2025 Consumer Pulse Survey, just about third of online adults (35% US and 30% UK) trust Meta (as a company) the same or more today than they did in 2024. And less than that have confidence in Mark Zuckerberg as the CEO of Meta (32% US and 28% UK). But whether a Meta breakup would ultimately be good for social media users or not, according to one of our poll respondents (referring to Instagram), “It depends who takes it over.” The Real Case To Keep Meta Intact? Interoperability. Some respondents in Forrester’s ConsumerVoices Market Research Online Community pointed to the connectivity and governance across Meta’s family of apps as a good thing. “It’s really easy right now when I post to Instagram, it posts automatically to my Facebook page without me having to do that, so it’s really convenient,” someone replied. Another said, “There’s uniformity of policies at the moment, for example, rules for teenagers, which makes it a little simpler.” Yet when we surveyed online adults in February, just 31% of them agreed that they benefit from Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp all being interoperable under one company (Meta). Forty-three percent disagreed with that statement (and 37% were neutral). A Meta Breakup Is A Seismic Social Media Market Reset The ramifications of this trial coupled with TikTok’s future in limbo potentially puts the very core of the social media market at play. No longer would Meta be its center of gravity. We haven’t seen anything like this since around 2006-2011—social media’s earliest days. Yes, there was a time when all of these apps were separate, and then some. We’d likely see a renaissance of social media startups looking to grab a piece of new social media world order. So, what would happen to Meta? Sure, Meta is trying to make Facebook cool again. But the company’s social media “insurance” is (and has been for a while)… Instagram. Without Instagram and WhatsApp, what really is Meta? Could Facebook seriously compete with a stand-alone Instagram? Can Threads monetize at scale? Doubtful. And the company absolutely should not hang its hat on its fledging metaverse ambitions. Its AI Glasses are a bright spot. As is its broader AI work (i.e. LLAMA). That means in a broken-up Meta, the company’s AI initiatives would usurp its social media roots. Would this be good for advertisers? Yes and no. It would certainly spawn a renewed wave of creativity in the marketplace. This could mean new and interesting ad types, targeting capabilities, and partnership opportunities. On the other hand, Meta’s sheer scale and reach is the one thing that makes the company’s family of apps a marketing mainstay. A more fragmented marketplace would reduce social media’s advertising efficiencies—making brands work harder to plan, buy, and create custom ads across a newly expanded portfolio of platforms. Here’s the big (unanswered) question: If Meta is just Facebook (once again), would today’s advertisers even bother with it? For now, marketing executives should keep doing what they’re doing. Meta’s not getting broken up anytime in the short-term. But hang tight and let the trial begin. Forrester clients: Let’s chat more about this via a Forrester guidance session. source

  What in the world is going on with messaging? Over the past few months, I have had numerous conversations where it seems that the responsibility for creating messaging has been upended. Messaging development has sprawled across too many areas within B2B teams, which has led to multiple, disparate — or even competing — versions of messages that get communicated to buyers and customers. Confusion is almost guaranteed, leading to frustration for both the provider and their buyers and customers. Product and portfolio marketing should own buyer-focused messaging. It has always been a core responsibility, as high-performing product and portfolio marketers are experts on understanding markets and buyers. They are uniquely qualified to develop effective messaging that resonates with buyers, helping buyers connect their needs to product offerings throughout the entire decision-making process. But results from Forrester’s Portfolio Marketing Survey, 2024, indicate that portfolio marketers are neglecting this crucial messaging responsibility. The survey gathered insights from product and portfolio marketing decision-makers based on their responses to questions about core responsibilities and key activities. Our research uncovered these alarming data points: Message creation ranked lowest as an important skill. Portfolio marketers have a broad remit, so it’s no surprise that they work on a variety of things and require a vast skill set. But when the survey asked respondents what skills are most important for being successful in their role, they ranked message creation dead last across all options, with only 11% selecting it as an important skill. More than 25% of portfolio marketers outsource messaging development. There’s nothing more important than understanding buyers and developing value propositions and messaging that connect a buyer’s needs to the capabilities of an offering. Yet one out of every four respondents indicated that they outsourced the development of messaging and value proposition to third parties. There are many things that are smart to outsource — messaging is not one of them! Messaging is not deemed as important in helping achieve business goals. Among eight key activity areas ranging from identifying new market opportunities to orchestrating product launches, messaging was at the very bottom of the list. Only 5% of respondents said that crafting messaging for buyers or offerings is the most important activity in helping the organization achieve its business goals. Portfolio marketers are spending time on non-core activities. It can be difficult to prioritize what to work on for a function that shoulders such a variety of responsibilities, but the survey results showed that portfolio marketers are spending just as much time on non-core activities, such as brand awareness and demand generation, as on messaging. Thirty-six percent of respondents indicated that they own or lead demand generation and 36% own or lead brand awareness efforts; this is compared to just 34% owning or leading messaging development. Portfolio marketing leaders need to take notice and respond quickly — make sure that your teams invest time for messaging development. Forrester clients can leverage The Messaging Nautilus®: Buyer’s Journey, a model made of four steps that helps portfolio marketers build concise, specific, and relevant messaging that motivates buyers throughout the purchase process. And if you would like to have a more detailed conversation with me, you can request a guidance session or inquiry — let’s chat! source

B2B campaigns are tough to execute. We work with many skilled, experienced marketers who still struggle to balance competing objectives for their company, customer needs, and the costs to create and promote programs. That’s why we hosted our first “Become The Ultimate Campaign Tycoon” workshop at the B2B Summit in Phoenix on April 1 — but it won’t be the last time. We found that participants enjoyed interacting with peers around a shared task that teaches them how to make the right calls for effective campaign programming. We aim to do more of these with our customers. Here’s the play-by-play: Teams were asked to complete a 12-month campaign execution calendar based on one of two market scenarios: existing customer retention and expansion or growth via new logo acquisition. Each team was given a $360,000 budget (in Forrester “bucks”) to use to buy programs and content. We focused on encouraging the use of each of the four campaign framework program families (reputation, demand, engagement, and enablement) and on extending content use across multiple programs to avoid the expensive production of content that is only used once. Our plan when crafting the workshop was to gather the teams’ completed campaign calendars, take some time to study them, and then name a winner. In reviewing the calendars, however, we were pleased to see that there were notable results and smart moves across many of the teams, and we decided not to choose a single winner. Instead, here are highlights from some of the teams: Team one did a nice job of mapping content evenly across reputation and demand programs for the growth marketing scenario and planned well for content and program reuse. Team two focused on engagement with a mature market while making a modest investment in demand to support upsell and cross-sell initiatives as well as attract potential net new buyers. They also funded enablement programs to produce reference stories designed to both train sales teams and reinforce customer relationships. Team three effectively distributed programs across the reputation, demand, engagement, and enablement program families. They created core, primary content assets early in the campaign year and reused or adapted derivative versions to sustain subsequent programs. Team four dedicated their demand spend for the mature market scenario to focus on intent tracking and paid social media to support upsell and cross-sell activities. They then invested a substantial portion of their budget in executive engagement efforts and other customer engagement activities. Team five demonstrated an understanding of best practices through the use of primary and derivative content across all program families. Since content is one of the most expensive components of a campaign budget, this approach is a dependably effective strategy. Campaigns are a balancing act. Working through the scenarios with the teams gave us a chance to talk through some strategic campaign management advice that we can encapsulate in a single world: balance. Successful campaigns have the right balance across the four program families. Under almost all circumstances, no single program family should be left unleveraged; they work together to deliver results. Even in cases where the focus is on demand, for example, brand programs are necessary to “surround” prospects and customers with a company’s unique story that sets the stage for that demand. Engagement programs for existing customers ensure that they understand the value of your relationship, which is especially important in retention-dependent businesses. Finally, too often we find that sales enablement programs get short shrift while campaign teams invest their energy in external audiences. In fact, arming sales and other revenue team players with campaign messaging, assets, and activities is critical for their use when they reach the point in deals where they must share information to help close business, as well as to drive loyalty and retention. The alignment of sales and marketing to support the selling process is an additional benefit that a campaign framework provides to B2B revenue teams. Could your company benefit from a workshop on building balanced, integrated campaigns? We’re seeking opportunities to customize the details to meet clients’ specific needs. Reach out to us if you’re interested. We’re always happy to provide clients with guidance sessions on campaign strategy and implementation. source

The new US tariffs — 10% generally, 34% on Chinese imports, and 20% on EU goods — have set the stage for increasing IT costs. The impacts will evolve over the next two to three quarters as vendors consider, develop, and roll out new pricing strategies. To navigate these challenges, identify worst-case, best-case, and likely scenarios, along with the specific actions needed to mitigate the heightened cost pressures entailed in each. Tariffs Will Affect More Than Just Hardware While the immediate hit will be on hardware budgets, ripple effects will cascade to other parts of the IT ecosystem as all providers and partners absorb higher infrastructure expenses: Rising device costs will collide with Windows 10 end of service. CIOs in the US could see a 45% price increase on laptops and tablets. This comes at an especially bad time, as many organizations are planning to refresh their Windows fleet ahead of the impending Windows 10 end of service this coming October. Tariffs will make mass capital expenditures for PCs more expensive, prompting many to: 1) delay their Windows 11 refresh and pay for extended support for Windows 10; 2) seek alternative approaches to a hardware refresh (e.g., virtual desktops); and 3) investigate opex-based purchasing (i.e., device as a service) to avoid a massive capex purchase (though prices will rise for both traditional purchasing and leasing). Servers, storage, and network equipment will be hit directly. IT infrastructure will likely see significant price increases as major manufacturing nations face high tariff rates, especially in the US. The rising costs could balloon budgets and force CIOs to delay or prioritize the most important projects. CIOs and other tech leaders will need to proactively analyze costs, diversify sourcing, optimize inventory, and prioritize the projects that don’t sacrifice critical AI ambitions. Cloud, SaaS, and other services costs aren’t immune. While not currently subject to tariffs, the cost of cloud, software as a service, and other services could go up as their underlying costs increase and exchange rates fluctuate. More concerning would be if other countries retaliate by directly targeting US services where there is a surplus to many countries. The US has a $100 billion services trade surplus with the EU. If the EU escalates its regulatory non-tariff barriers to trade in services, including managed services or hyperscaler capacity, unit costs for American customers could increase while European customers’ choice of local solutions dwindles. Price hikes will surface in unrelated — seemingly risk-free — areas. Service providers and even software vendors will find ways to recoup cost, even for contracts seemingly unavailable for renegotiation. For example, a large enterprise that has purchased several products from the same vendor may find higher-than-usual price increases on a completely unrelated renewal to offset the inability to affect contracts directly impacted by the tariffs. This occurred previously during the US-China trade war in 2018–2019, when many tech hardware vendors were hit with 25% import tariffs on components. These vendors added a “tariff surcharge” to fixed price agreements, which many customers reluctantly paid. Heightened chip supply concerns could jeopardize AI plans. The disruption caused by changing the funding and tax incentives of the US Chips Act will also have long-term cost implications. While chip manufacturing in the US is announced, those plants will not start delivering before 2027. A threat in Europe’s trade-negotiation arsenal is restricting export of ASML machinery. If implemented, this could negatively impact chip supply in the medium term. The result: more price increases. US CIOs should plan to boost AI project budgets, as previously allocated budgets will likely not suffice to continue these projects at their current pace. Identify And Prepare For Four Scenarios Indiscriminate budget cuts can be costly and undermine priorities such as AI-led business and IT transformation that are crucial to long-term success. Forrester has identified a number of cost-cutting options that are much more targeted and, in many cases, overdue — e.g., app portfolio consolidation and rationalization. Even more effective is to embrace scenario-based planning. Envisioning best- and worst-case outcomes and mapping potential scenarios (such as recession-driven cuts, demand surges, and regulatory shifts) builds a proactive response toolbox. Consider these four scenarios: Scenario 1: Tariff pause or delay. Earlier this year, the Trump administration paused initial tariffs on Canadian and Mexican goods. We could see a similar reaction this time around, either due to domestic pressure or international negotiations. This is the most favorable scenario and the least likely, however. Even in this scenario, CIOs should engage in difficult prioritization discussions, as we project that real GDP will slow sharply to 1.8% over the next three years, and tech spending growth typically follows this closely. In addition, procurement teams should be engaged now to assess current contracts in flight and prepare for possibly contentious midterm renegotiation scenarios (see next scenario). Scenario 2: Tariff reductions. Negotiations occur and certain tariffs are reduced, but there is a new normal of trade tariffs that businesses just adapt to over time. Markets expected a 10% average tariff (on goods, not services) initially, so after the initial dust settles and negotiations occur, this is a reasonable and likely outcome. Regarding prioritization, CIOs should partner with their executive peers to rank-order key business priorities in terms of value to the company and have an agreement on where to draw the line for demand cuts in response to tariff actions. This line will likely need to be mobile, as tariff actions can either be minimal or highly escalatory (see next scenario). Scenario 3: Escalating retaliatory trade tariffs. In this worst-case scenario, negotiations are unsuccessful, and impacted nations impose equal tariffs on goods as well as add services to the mix where the US tends to have a trade surplus. In this scenario, CIOs must pursue an urgent overhaul of spend management playbooks, prioritize ruthlessly, and defer non-essential hardware upgrades to navigate the heightened cost pressures and potential talent constraints. CIOs will also need to support the business in urgent work to review strategic options for supply chain reconfiguration

The Forrester Wave™: Customer Relationship Management Software, Q1 2025, our latest evaluation of CRM providers, shows a market on the cusp of change. Agentic AI reshapes the value of CRM as we know it. Looking a decade or more into the future, the landscape of front-office jobs will likely be significantly transformed. At this point, agentic AI — not humans — will be the first touchpoint for all customer interactions. The front office will be dedicated to supporting and optimizing automations. Of course, there will still be a need for human engagement — for consultative sales, for relationship building, or for addressing customer issues that carry emotion. But the number of these roles will lessen as much of customer operations shifts to the middle and back office. There will also be a need for new roles such as AI supervisors that manage the success of AI to business goals. Also, AI agents will get stuck mid-process and will require human intervention in real time to make a simple decision, which paves the path for a “bot unblocker” job. The CRMs Of The Future Will Embrace Agentic AI CRMs themselves will change — and they are already doing so today. For example, CRMs will contain: An agentic layer. CRMs will package AI agents for predefined tasks and actions. They will include an AI agent studio to create agents. They will include integration frameworks to access data from other apps. Also, they will include orchestration and observability capabilities to manage and govern AI agents toward business goals. Vendors will offer marketplaces for AI agents, such as what Salesforce is doing today. A data layer to access real-time enterprise and customer data. A low-code platform to create custom workflows and extensions. The quality of this platform will be one of the major decisions in selecting a CRM. CRM workflows. Gone will be the days of monolithic CRM clouds. CRMs will be deconstructed into resuable components and will be accessible via AI agents and other business apps. Industry workflows will retain value. Also, end-to-end workflows will be more valuable than the ones constrained to the front office. Trust, security, and compliance. CRMs, like they do today, must comply to industry regulations and must ensure governance, trust, fairness, and protection for all data used in AI models. New UX. Experiences will be role-based — for example, a relationship manager may engage with customers via video, with augmented-reality overlays, while automation supervisors work in dashboards. The user experience will also be primarily conversational. Screens will contain less data and fewer options for the user. CRM data and workflows will be embedded into and accessed via other business applications. We already see signs of this transformation. Every CRM vendor in the Wave has released AI agents, as well as developer tools to manage AI agents. What has to happen now is a refactoring of current CRM capabilities for this agentic future. Connect with me via inquiry or briefing to continue this conversation. source

When discussing digital transformation and innovation with clients in the banking and financial services (FS) sector, identity verification (IDV) often tops their agenda. A seamless digital onboarding experience is crucial, and it can determine whether a customer proceeds with or abandons a new banking relationship. There is also a growing need for more seamless, effective, and secure IDV in the FS industry due to the rise of sophisticated fraud tactics like deepfakes and increasingly complex regulatory requirements. My latest report, The State Of Identity Verification In The Financial Services Industry, highlights four key challenges that FS firms face: Deepfakes are challenging established IDV capabilities. The increase in AI-generated content means that deepfake-related cyberattacks are on the rise. Generative AI (genAI) face attacks, face-swapping, and synthetic faces will continue to be increasingly common; to combat these threats, we expect that IDV vendors will increase their investments in genAI-based deepfake detection technologies like generative adversarial networks and multimodal sense algorithms. Outdated onboarding experiences are stalling business growth. Customers demand fast and reliable onboarding processes, but traditional IDV methods create friction and false positives, deterring legitimate customers and reducing conversion rates. FS firms need to offer integrated identity experiences during onboarding and beyond to address ongoing authentication throughout customer journeys. Regulatory compliance is increasingly complex and costly. Evolving regulations — such as regional mandates, privacy laws, know-your-customer, and anti-money-laundering regulations — are adding compliance pressure. Firms need flexible and scalable IDV solutions to navigate these complexities. Managing IDV costs is becoming crucial. As competition for new customers intensifies, FS firms strive to enhance UX and lower the cost of acquiring customers. For example, pay-per-IDV-check allows FS firms to reduce cost at scale. Multilayered verification systems also help FS firms avoid costly and time-consuming checks, thus providing improved UX. Involve Multiple Roles And Stakeholders When Adopting IDV Solutions Beyond its role in fraud prevention, IDV solutions build customer trust and support business growth. A multistakeholder approach is crucial for adopting these solutions because it ensures comprehensive risk management, enhances customer experience, and meets regulatory standards. Fraud and risk management teams focus on protecting against sophisticated threats like identity theft and account takeover fraud; customer experience teams ensure that IDV processes do not hinder smooth onboarding, balancing security with usability; and compliance officers stay updated on regulatory changes and ensure adherence to requirements, preventing financial crimes such as money laundering. By involving these key stakeholders, FS firms can adopt robust, user-friendly, and compliant IDV solutions, leading to better business outcomes. Improve The Effectiveness Of Each IDV Lifecycle Stage With Key IDV Technologies IDV solutions are evolving rapidly, and FS firms should implement dynamic IDV strategies to optimize verification paths, reduce friction, and enhance UX. My report features a useful graphic that maps out key IDV technologies that firms should leverage at each IDV lifecycle stage to improve the experience and effectiveness.   FS firms are increasingly challenged on many fronts, and they must move away from manual and legacy IDV processes that hinder growth, create operational inefficiencies, and increase fraud risk. FS firms must adopt modern IDV solutions to stay competitive, ensure regulatory compliance, and provide a superior customer experience. Read our full report, The State Of Identity Verification In The Financial Services Industry, to explore these insights, enhance your IDV processes, improve customer experiences, ensure regulatory compliance, and achieve better business outcomes. Forrester clients can schedule a guidance session or inquiry with me for further discussion. source