Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts.
Speaker 2: Radio News.
Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg BusinessWeek with Carol Messer and Tim
Speaker 1: Stenebek on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 3: I don't know if you guys saw this in the
Speaker 3: pharmaceutical industry today, Snofi is going to pay more than
Speaker 3: one hundred million dollars to settle about four thousand lawsuits
Speaker 3: accusing the drug maker of failing to warn users that
Speaker 3: at Zantac heartburn med could cause cancer. This according to
Speaker 3: people familiar with the deal cited by Bloomberg. Remember Zantak
Speaker 3: was recalled back in twenty nineteen. It was a month
Speaker 3: after an independent lab announced publicly it found the likely
Speaker 3: carc carcinogen and DMA, and the drug US regulators confirm
Speaker 3: the findings in April of twenty twenty and ordered the
Speaker 3: medicine off the market, no longer sold.
Speaker 4: No, it's interesting a massive drug though that was out there.
Speaker 4: I think my dad used to use it a lot.
Speaker 4: The reason we're bringing this up is because the Global
Speaker 4: Communications and Marketing from Edelman is that with its latest
Speaker 4: Trust Barometer special report, which focuses on trust and health,
Speaker 4: and the finding show that trust in healthcare companies is
Speaker 4: declining not just in the United States, but also in Japan, Germany, India,
Speaker 4: China and the eleven other countries Edelman Study. So back
Speaker 4: with us as Richard Edelman, CEO of Edelman, joining us
Speaker 4: here in New York City. Richard, great to have you
Speaker 4: back with Tim and myself.
Speaker 5: Hope you are well, happy passover.
Speaker 4: Happy passover, and tell us a little bit about third
Speaker 4: year in a row that you guys are looking at
Speaker 4: trust and health, specifically that connection healthcare companies, which, by
Speaker 4: the way, in the US fell from the trust to
Speaker 4: distrust to do what is right. That really stood out
Speaker 4: for us. Walk us through though what you guys look
Speaker 4: at and what the finding was, and what jumped out
Speaker 4: for you who have been tracking this for a while.
Speaker 5: So, Carol, I think the big change this year is
Speaker 5: the jump in health empowerment, which means that you know,
Speaker 5: eighty plus percent of people believe that they are able
Speaker 5: to take care of their own health. And that's a
Speaker 5: big positive because it means that you know, they'll be
Speaker 5: going to check their blood pressure or you know, get
Speaker 5: information on their own. However, their trust in institutions in
Speaker 5: health has plummeted, so trust in reporting about health or
Speaker 5: trust in the CDC or the WHO has declined massively,
Speaker 5: and it's a sort of maybe a PTSD from COVID
Speaker 5: nineteen and so in a way, the result is a
Speaker 5: little bit like the kid wants to drive the car
Speaker 5: and you don't have drivers at and so you know,
Speaker 5: it's great to be, you know, enabled, but you'll also
Speaker 5: have to know the facts. And fifty five percent of
Speaker 5: people in eighteen to thirty four said I've made a
Speaker 5: bad health decision as a result of misinformation. Interesting, so
Speaker 5: the outcome is not good, Richard.
Speaker 3: Can we can we lump all of these institutions together,
Speaker 3: the WHO, the CDC, and healthcare companies, because to me,
Speaker 3: these are distinct entities.
Speaker 5: They are distinct, and yet what people are seeing is
Speaker 5: that they can't get the straight story. They don't they
Speaker 5: don't get good quality information, and they are inclined to act.
Speaker 5: They want to eat better, they want to live better.
Speaker 5: Eighty five percent of the respondent said I could have
Speaker 5: better health. That's positive. What's negative is they no longer
Speaker 5: believe classing institutional forces. They do believe themselves, and they
Speaker 5: believe their own doctors. And for the doctors, we've got
Speaker 5: to give them time to talk to the patients about
Speaker 5: the information, because otherwise they're just prescribing or just saying,
Speaker 5: you know, do this, and the patients need to actually
Speaker 5: test their theories with the doctor. He's the one or
Speaker 5: she's the one person. I believe.
Speaker 4: I'm curious. You know. One of the reasons we love
Speaker 4: talking with you. There's many, but one of the reasons is,
Speaker 4: you know, is that the CEOs, the leaders that you
Speaker 4: are talked to, that you talk to on a regular
Speaker 4: basis all different types of industries, including the healthcare industry.
Speaker 4: I mean, I feel like this is one industry that
Speaker 4: is lagging in disruption. We keep talking about how technology
Speaker 4: should make it better. I think Tim and I both
Speaker 4: know people who have become doctors. It takes a lot
Speaker 4: of time, takes a lot of money, it's a lot
Speaker 4: of work, and who are like, I want out and
Speaker 4: it just is shocking. And I see the shortages and
Speaker 4: get worried about, you know, an aging population, who's going
Speaker 4: to take care of everybody. It's great, we have all
Speaker 4: these medical innovations that keep people alive longer, but you're worried.
Speaker 4: I don't know, I wonder if we're going to have
Speaker 4: you know, the medical community there to take care of everybody.
Speaker 4: What are you hearing from leaders you talk to in
Speaker 4: the healthcare industry and even outside about kind of what's
Speaker 4: going on in terms of health.
Speaker 5: I think Carol, you're dead right about the number of
Speaker 5: doctors retiring or opting out. We do have to rely
Speaker 5: not just on them, though, but also on nurses and pharmacists,
Speaker 5: the broader array of potential advisors to patients. But we
Speaker 5: really have to reduce the administrative burden. Use AI to advantage,
Speaker 5: make sure that the time spending spend on filling out
Speaker 5: forms is just not valuable. That's just bureaucracy. Give them
Speaker 5: time to talk to patients. That's why people go into
Speaker 5: the medical provision to make people better.
Speaker 3: I do wonder though, again, separating all the different entities
Speaker 3: that you discuss in the trust barometer, there is this
Speaker 3: one that sticks out first. How do you define healthcare companies?
Speaker 3: Does that include insurers? Does it include pharmaceutical manufacturers? Who
Speaker 3: does that include?
Speaker 5: It's mostly pharma companies and the hospitals and people dealing directly.
Speaker 3: Okay, very interesting. So I think it's interesting because a
Speaker 3: couple of years ago we had a Bloomberg business we
Speaker 3: cover story and it's sort of the height of the
Speaker 3: pandemic when the vaccine companies had come out and Operation
Speaker 3: Warps had worked and they'd created these vaccines, and it
Speaker 3: was about how the idea that these companies went from
Speaker 3: being so hated among consumers to loved among consumers because
Speaker 3: they had created the vaccine. And I just wonder in
Speaker 3: terms of the stakeholders who are out there, the shareholders,
Speaker 3: the customers, I wonder how you sort of make sense
Speaker 3: of these results, because I think a lot of people
Speaker 3: would argue, well, you know, I do see these farmer
Speaker 3: companies out there, and I'm just wondering, since they're for
Speaker 3: profit companies, since they're responsible to stake to their shareholders
Speaker 3: first and foremost is everyone's best interest there.
Speaker 5: So I think the intrusion of politics into healthcare has
Speaker 5: put a big damper on the sector, meaning that health
Speaker 5: should not be politicized. Whether you're Trump or Biden, you
Speaker 5: did the best you could during a really uncertain time,
Speaker 5: and the outcome of health must not be something that
Speaker 5: is used as a kind of political stick by the
Speaker 5: other side. It should be off limits in the sense
Speaker 5: that we want to take care of people, we want
Speaker 5: to have them have good quality. I mean, polonization of
Speaker 5: medical science is now more problematic as a fear than
Speaker 5: affordability of care or concern about another pandemic. That tells
Speaker 5: you something. People understand that stuff is being politicized. It's
Speaker 5: why nobody trusts the information. And it's also why I
Speaker 5: really believe we have to go through companies, for example,
Speaker 5: a company's own newsletter, an NGO's newsletter. We've got to
Speaker 5: use every possible means of educating the patients because they
Speaker 5: feel really confused, and when they're confused, they're paralyzed well.
Speaker 4: And we've got to chart up for those who are
Speaker 4: watching on YouTube and Bloomberger originals. Maybe we can bring
Speaker 4: it back up for everybody, Elizabeth, But it's just interesting
Speaker 4: that four and ten young people will only trust providers
Speaker 4: aligned with their politics. So that's pretty amazing. So forty
Speaker 4: one percent age eighty eighteen to thirty four, thirty five
Speaker 4: percent thirty five to fifty four, and about eighteen percent
Speaker 4: fifty five plus. I got to tell you, I don't
Speaker 4: think I ever know the politics for the most part.
Speaker 4: There's been some doctors in my life, you know, who've
Speaker 4: been there for many, many years, and we get to
Speaker 4: know each other, and so then we sometimes will go
Speaker 4: and have some you know, conversations that go in different areas.
Speaker 4: But for the most part, I have no idea.
Speaker 1: Do you ever know, No, it's.
Speaker 3: Never occurred to me, Richard, what do you say to that?
Speaker 5: But Carol again, think about it. So, oh so I
Speaker 5: hear this doctor is a trumpert. Therefore, you know, I'm
Speaker 5: a liberal Democrat. Therefore he must be in favor of
Speaker 5: hydroxychloroquine or some other thing magic cures. You can see
Speaker 5: how that happens. It should not be in the doctor's office.
Speaker 5: It should be what do you have, what's the best
Speaker 5: way of curing this, and here's the science. Let's talk
Speaker 5: about it, agreed, and that's the best way.
Speaker 4: Yeah. It's just interesting though, man, I'm always some fascinating findings. Richard,
Speaker 4: good to check in with you again. I hope Paul
Speaker 4: as well. Richard Edelman, chief executive officer of Edelman joining
Speaker 4: us there in New York City. But interesting, I will
Speaker 4: say that there are a couple of doctors that've been
Speaker 4: with for a long time and then you kind of
Speaker 4: get an idea of how they're feeling. But I'm like,
Speaker 4: great doctor, I'm Okay, I just ignore it.
Speaker 3: I don't ever encounter that they don't do. How do
Speaker 3: you spend it? I can't spend enough time with doctors.
Speaker 3: They're in and out.
Speaker 4: Do you have any do doctors that had been in
Speaker 4: your life for a long time.
Speaker 3: Or you get to kind of friends. But yeah, no,
Speaker 3: I mean I feel like we don't get time with
Speaker 3: doctors these days. You're in and out.
Speaker 4: I have a couple of doctors, and that's why I
Speaker 4: stay with them.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Business Week inside from the reporters and
Speaker 1: editors who bring you America's most trusted business magazine, plus
Speaker 1: global business, finance and tech news as it happens. Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business Week with Carol Messer and Tim Steneveek on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 3: It is Bloomberg Business Week. You just mentioned this, but
Speaker 3: it's worth repeating because I think it's really interesting the
Speaker 3: way it moved in video stock today, soft Bank investing
Speaker 3: one hundred and fifty billion yen it's about nine hundred
Speaker 3: and seventy billion dollars by twenty twenty five to boost
Speaker 3: its computing power for generative AI and buying equipment from
Speaker 3: in Video for it.
Speaker 4: Yeah, it's pretty amazing. I think you mean nine hundred
Speaker 4: and seventy million, isn't it? Yes, thank you, that's okay,
Speaker 4: nearly a billion dollars. N hundred and seventy billion, man,
Speaker 4: that's a lot, thank you.
Speaker 3: I was doing it, has doing some currency conversion in
Speaker 3: my head.
Speaker 4: Tim does that, he does do it. Don't go there,
Speaker 4: all right, So let's get to it with some thoughts
Speaker 4: on AI, which is something that it feels like creeps
Speaker 4: into every conversation we do, and what it means specifically
Speaker 4: to our workflow and to our world. Back with us.
Speaker 4: As the CEO and founder of Creatio, Catherine Costa Riva
Speaker 4: is with us. This company, by the way, it's a
Speaker 4: CRM or what we call customer relationship management company, and
Speaker 4: it sells software that automates workflows. Catherine joining us on
Speaker 4: Zoom from Boston. Nice to have you back with us.
Speaker 4: Tell us about your world. I think it was back
Speaker 4: in August, so it's been a few months. How is
Speaker 4: your world changed? Tell us what's going on and updates
Speaker 4: on everything.
Speaker 2: Hello, Hello, Carol team. It's very nice to be here again,
Speaker 2: and thank you very much for having me. Listen. Things
Speaker 2: are changing very rapidly. I could put it this way, and.
Speaker 4: We are here extremely.
Speaker 2: Excited about the opportunity to combine no code applications and AI.
Speaker 2: If you remember this conversation back in August when we
Speaker 2: discussed this power and magic of no code. When non
Speaker 2: professional software developers can build their own applications and automate
Speaker 2: their workflows, AI makes them extremely more productive and efficient
Speaker 2: as they develop their own apps. So no code and
Speaker 2: AI together, that's the new future for us.
Speaker 3: Remind everyone who doesn't remember our interview with you back
Speaker 3: in August or listening then, what no code and low
Speaker 3: code are and the way that we see the manifest
Speaker 3: start today.
Speaker 2: Sure were happy, happy to do that. Listen. Not many
Speaker 2: people know, but in the world there are twenty five
Speaker 2: million software developers professional software developers. And when you think
Speaker 2: about this number, it sounds like a big number, right,
Speaker 2: twenty five million people. And by the way, the population
Speaker 2: of software developers is growing like four percent year over year.
Speaker 2: But when you think about the number of workflows and
Speaker 2: applications that need to be automated in the enterprises, in
Speaker 2: the companies like Bluebird for example, or any other company
Speaker 2: out there, there are hundreds of millions of applications that
Speaker 2: need to be built and automated. So when you do
Speaker 2: your mass you easily understand that twenty five million software
Speaker 2: developers is obviously not enough to automate to satisfy the
Speaker 2: demand of five hundred million apps that need to be automated.
Speaker 2: So to resolve this problem, no code comes into play,
Speaker 2: and we engage knowledge workers, people actually like yourself, professionals
Speaker 2: in different jobs and areas other than software developers, to
Speaker 2: automate your own workflows, because who knows your workflows better
Speaker 2: than you know them? So you can drag and drop
Speaker 2: and actually develop your own application, your own workflow management
Speaker 2: application to automate the workflow in your organization. And it
Speaker 2: could be a front office application like sales management, market
Speaker 2: and automation, service management, you name it. But also it
Speaker 2: could be middle office or even back office operations like
Speaker 2: HR workflows or any document management workflow. So we're talking
Speaker 2: about the workflows, enterprojects and automation through knowledge workers.
Speaker 4: Catherine, I thought, you know, all the SaaS companies have
Speaker 4: been doing this for a while long time, so help
Speaker 4: me understand what the difference is. I mean in terms
Speaker 4: of how generative AIS and machine learning is going to
Speaker 4: help you know, work with all of us, because again,
Speaker 4: we've been automated, automating back office, a lot of operations
Speaker 4: to do a lot of the jobs that used to
Speaker 4: be done by humans. Pick up a phone and you
Speaker 4: call any institution, takes a while to actually get to
Speaker 4: a human for the most part, because so many things
Speaker 4: are being automated. So help me understand in our general lives,
Speaker 4: work and play, how this kind of could impact us.
Speaker 4: Be as specific as you can, because I think that
Speaker 4: helps us really understand what the difference between the automated
Speaker 4: world we've been living in for some time already and
Speaker 4: what it means when we use jen Ai and it
Speaker 4: takes us to a whole other level.
Speaker 2: Brilliant, And that's a brilliant question, Carol. Let's let's talk
Speaker 2: with no code itself and then add AI on top
Speaker 2: of it. So when you think about those workflows that
Speaker 2: you just mentioned, Carol, on average, it takes waters months
Speaker 2: to automate any workflow you just mentioned when when you
Speaker 2: were asking the question, like we're talking about long period
Speaker 2: of time. And then think about the reality, just the
Speaker 2: news that you just brought to all of us. The
Speaker 2: world is changing so fast and you need to adapt
Speaker 2: and you need to change those processes as fast as
Speaker 2: the world is changing. And if it takes you months
Speaker 2: or quarters or sometimes years to automate one workflow, how
Speaker 2: fast can you actually change it? And this is the
Speaker 2: beauty of no code when you can change your workflows
Speaker 2: on the fly, not being a professional software developer. Now
Speaker 2: to your question, when we add AI on top of it,
Speaker 2: you can actually ask your no code application like creation. Listen,
Speaker 2: I need to automate the healthcare customer service workflow and
Speaker 2: provide some specifics and you just define, You talk to
Speaker 2: the application, and you give instructions what exactly you want
Speaker 2: to build out there, and AI builds it for you. Obviously,
Speaker 2: at the current point of time, this is not a
Speaker 2: very sophisticated application with thousands of fields and workflows behind it,
Speaker 2: but that's a very very solid foundation. So actually AI
Speaker 2: builds this application or automates this workflow instead of the humans,
Speaker 2: and then humans like ourselves, non professional software developers, they
Speaker 2: twike it. They add fields, they add logics, they add dashboards,
Speaker 2: they add workflow, so they tweak the application that was
Speaker 2: built by AI. And that is why I'm saying that
Speaker 2: the synergy of no code and AI is so powerful
Speaker 2: because actually AI augments our work.
Speaker 3: Right speak, Catherine eraises the question that I think a
Speaker 3: lot of people have about to what extent you know,
Speaker 3: jobs are at risk here for people who are coders
Speaker 3: out there, and it's something that we ask a lot
Speaker 3: of our guests. I mean, how do you look at this?
Speaker 2: Listen. I have a very very strong position here. It
Speaker 2: augments our lives. Okay, it makes actually us much more
Speaker 2: efficient and productively.
Speaker 3: View all of the programmer jobs.
Speaker 2: Listen, There's going to be some areas where it's going
Speaker 2: to be a replacement, but replacement for good because when
Speaker 2: you are not doing a routine job that can be
Speaker 2: easily done by AI, you will be doing more intelligent
Speaker 2: work that will actually make you even more valuable on
Speaker 2: the market. So you as a professional are going to
Speaker 2: be growing in your skills because you will need to
Speaker 2: do more advanced work because all the routine jobs will
Speaker 2: be done by AI. So again it's all mentioned rather
Speaker 2: than augmentation, rather than replacement.
Speaker 4: So can you give us a specific example a company
Speaker 4: or something that's in our lives And I'm just trying
Speaker 4: to figure out whether it's going to the doctor, whether
Speaker 4: it's a company. I don't know. Give us something specific
Speaker 4: of how it might change. It's got about unfortunately a
Speaker 4: minute left, but I'd love to kind of drill down
Speaker 4: there and understand a little bit more.
Speaker 2: Sure and listen this example that you ask me, Carol
Speaker 2: about the call centers, right, all of that automated. Let's
Speaker 2: let's take this example from the time that the customer
Speaker 2: first reaches out to the time that a customer service
Speaker 2: representative opens up a case and addresses actually the issue.
Speaker 2: AI can do this work so much faster from finding
Speaker 2: similar cases and actually offering these solutions. Moreover, the solution
Speaker 2: is going to be customized considering all the previous history
Speaker 2: of relationships with you as a client, you as an individual,
Speaker 2: so actually again making this conversation much more intelligent than
Speaker 2: it used to be in the past.
Speaker 4: So is it going to be an automated conversation or
Speaker 4: you're saying that information will be at the fingertips of
Speaker 4: a human who can look at it and through generative
Speaker 4: AI will come to some smart conclusion based on all
Speaker 4: the conversations we've had. So it's much more productive for
Speaker 4: the user. And again just twenty five.
Speaker 2: Seconds, right, it can be either way, So it depends
Speaker 2: on your preference. If you want, like you want to
Speaker 2: be engaged into the conversation, it will do exactly as
Speaker 2: you described. If you want to do it all automated,
Speaker 2: it can't be done still all automated. And this is
Speaker 2: again the beauty of AI that you have the choice
Speaker 2: which way to go.
Speaker 4: All right, We got to leave it there, Hey, Catherine,
Speaker 4: fun to check in with you again and catch up.
Speaker 4: Catherine Costa Riva. She is, of course the CEO and
Speaker 4: founder of Creatio, joining us there from Boston. Would you
Speaker 4: rather talk with some an automated, smart, automated or human human?
Speaker 2: Still? What about you?
Speaker 4: Depends mostly human?
Speaker 3: Yeah, yeah, I got to explain myself, especially those.
Speaker 4: Like some things should go back and back and you've
Speaker 4: got to start again, and you're like, if there's something
Speaker 4: that that history could be right there? All right, folks,
Speaker 4: more to come right here on Bloomberg Business Rate. This
Speaker 4: is Bloomberg