A sweeping shift in how enterprises leverage product data is shaping competitive dynamics across industries. A new NI survey reveals that nearly half of companies operate with a limited data strategy, relying on product data from only a few functional domains. This constraint persists despite ongoing macroeconomic pressures and a relentless push toward faster, smarter product development. The findings come from a survey of 300 product innovators spanning multiple sectors, and they highlight a substantial performance gap between limited-data organizations and those pursuing a comprehensive, enterprise-wide product data strategy. Over the last year, only a minority of the broader group achieved faster time-to-market, while advanced players pulled ahead on key performance indicators such as innovation output, workforce productivity, and manufacturing efficiency. The contrast underscores the transformative potential of end-to-end data integration across the product lifecycle and the risk of stagnation for those who fail to unlock data from design through in-use stages.
Limited vs advanced data strategy
The study’s core distinction between limited and advanced data strategies centers on how comprehensively organizations collect, harmonize, and analyze product-related data across the entire lifecycle. In a landscape where product success increasingly hinges on speed and scale, the ability to extract actionable insights from a wide data spectrum is no longer optional; it is a strategic condition for competitiveness. The NI survey highlights that 47% of surveyed companies operate with a limited data strategy, a condition defined by reliance on data from only a narrow set of functional areas rather than a holistic, lifecycle-spanning data framework. This is especially problematic in complex manufacturing environments, where valuable information resides not only in product design and testing but also in manufacturing throughput, process validation, supply chain dynamics, and the performance of products in real-world use.
The survey’s respondents — 300 product innovators drawn from diverse industries — indicate that a sizable share of organizations underutilize critical data streams such as manufacturing and engineering data. This underutilization translates into a tangible gap in business outcomes when compared with enterprises that deploy an advanced, company-wide product data strategy. The data reveal that over the past year, a smaller fraction of the limited-data cohort experienced acceleration in time-to-market, and the disparity widens across other dimensions of performance. Specifically, only 33% of the broad group reported faster time-to-market over the last 12 months, versus 52% among advanced organizations. Beyond speed, the gulf extends to innovation, productivity, and manufacturing efficiency. Innovation levels stood at 51% for the broader group, contrasted with 63% for those with advanced strategies. Employee productivity registered 50% for the broader cohort compared with 62% among advanced players. Manufacturing efficiency showed a more pronounced divergence: 41% for the broad set versus 58% for the advanced group. Taken together, these figures illustrate the tangible benefits of unlocking data from across the full product lifecycle.
To understand the significance of these numbers, it helps to articulate what a fully integrated product data strategy entails. It means capturing, connecting, and analyzing data from design (concepts, simulations, validations), through validation and testing, into manufacturing data (process controls, yield, throughput), and into the in-use phase (field performance, maintenance, customer feedback). When data from these stages are unified, organizations can refine processes with greater precision, iterate products more rapidly, and deliver breakthroughs that scale across production lines and geographies. In a market where speed-to-value and product differentiation are critical, the ability to correlate design choices with real-world performance and manufacturing outcomes becomes a fundamental capability. The NI survey’s emphasis on the full lifecycle reflects a growing consensus that the most substantial improvements in efficiency and time-to-market are achieved not by optimizing isolated functions but by orchestrating data across the entire product journey. The current reality — that many organizations still fall short of this integrated approach — helps explain why even modest gains in data strategy translate into outsized competitive advantages for those who pursue it aggressively.
The broader takeaway from this first section is clear: unlocking data across the entire product lifecycle is not a luxury but a necessity for refining processes and delivering groundbreaking products at scale. In today’s market environment, where customer expectations are accelerating and competition is intensifying, the ability to converge insights from design, validation, production, and in-use phases emerges as a core driver of operational excellence and strategic advantage. For enterprises seeking to stay ahead, the imperative is not merely to collect data but to weave it into a unified, accessible, and actionable information fabric that enables rapid learning and responsive decision-making at all organizational levels.
Impact of missing data across the product lifecycle
When data from the full spectrum of the product lifecycle remains dispersed or underutilized, organizations miss opportunities to tighten feedback loops, validate design hypotheses, and optimize manufacturing workflows. The NI survey results illuminate how limited data strategies constrain a company’s capacity to deliver high-impact results in a competitive landscape where speed, quality, and adaptability determine success. The absence of integrated lifecycle data often manifests as slower learning cycles, more frequent rework, and a higher incidence of bottlenecks that impede not only time-to-market but also the ability to translate design intent into reliable production outcomes and compelling field performance.
A central consequence of limited data strategies is that insights derived from design and testing do not consistently propagate into manufacturing and in-use phases. Without a coherent data framework that ties design decisions to manufacturing realities and customer experiences, enterprises lose the ability to predict how small design variations will impact production efficiency, reliability, and long-term product health. This disconnect leads to missed optimization opportunities, as well as a lack of visibility into how deployed products behave in the field. The NI survey points to a measurable drag on key performance indicators when data from manufacturing, engineering, and in-use data streams are not engaged in concert with design data. The absence of end-to-end data feedback means that corrective actions become reactive rather than proactive, reducing the organization’s capacity to anticipate failures, optimize maintenance intervals, and proactively iterate product specifications.
From a process perspective, limited data strategies contribute to inefficiencies at several junctures. In the design phase, limited access to manufacturing feedback can cause engineers to favor designs that look optimal in simulations but that underperform in real-world production settings. In the validation phase, data fragmentation can prevent a clear understanding of why certain tests fail or why certain configurations yield marginal improvements. In production, the lack of integrated analytics can obscure which process adjustments most effectively improve yield, throughput, or quality. In-use data — the performance and reliability data gathered from deployed products — may remain siloed, preventing the organization from closing the loop back to design and validation in a timely manner. Over time, this fragmentation creates a cumulative drain on innovation velocity, increases development risk, and makes it harder to realize the promised business value of advanced product data strategies.
The survey’s year-over-year lens underscores that organizations with limited data strategies face slower improvement across several dimensions. The metrics reflect not only the absence of integrated analytics but also a broader cultural and organizational challenge: when teams cannot see how their work influences downstream outcomes, alignment frays, and cross-functional collaboration suffers. Conversely, advanced data strategies leverage a centralized data architecture, standardized data governance, and cross-functional analytics that empower teams to draw on shared insights. This approach accelerates learning and reduces the distance between discovery and execution. The practical implication for executives and managers is straightforward: investment in end-to-end data infrastructure and governance is not merely an IT initiative; it is a strategic enabler of faster, more reliable product development, and a differentiator in markets where competitive dynamics hinge on data-driven differentiation and speed.
From a strategic standpoint, the findings signal the importance of treating the product lifecycle as an integrated system rather than a collection of isolated stages. By consolidating data across design, validation, production, and use, organizations can illuminate hidden correlations, test hypotheses more robustly, and unlock process improvements that ripple across the business. The potential benefits are substantial: improved time-to-market, higher rates of innovation, stronger workforce productivity, and more efficient manufacturing operations. While the NI survey demonstrates that many organizations still operate with a limited data scope, it also reinforces the premise that widening the data lens — and orchestrating insights across all lifecycle stages — is a powerful lever for competitive differentiation in today’s fast-moving environment. The challenge, of course, lies in overcoming data silos, aligning incentives, and building an architecture and governance model capable of sustaining cross-functional analytics at scale. Those who navigate this transition are positioned to realize the full value of product data and to translate advanced analytics into tangible business outcomes that endure across cycles of market volatility and technological disruption.
Gaps in advanced strategy and what they reveal
Even among organizations that have advanced data strategies, significant gaps persist that prevent them from extracting the full potential of their data assets. The NI survey highlights that only a minority of companies with advanced strategies are currently harnessing the complete spectrum of their data to optimize processes and inform design decisions. Specifically, just 29% of these advanced-data-strategy organizations reported using manufacturing data to improve production processes. Additionally, only 24% were combining the full breadth of their engineering, manufacturing, and in-use data to achieve deeper, more actionable insights. These figures reveal a disconcerting reality: even when a company makes progress toward a cohesive data framework, the practical utilization of data—particularly in the manufacturing and post-release phases—often remains underexploited.
Several factors contribute to these gaps, and understanding them is crucial for designing effective remedies. First, data analytics capability may be uneven across the organization. While some teams have the tools and expertise to extract insights from integrated datasets, others may lack the required analytics maturity, data literacy, or governance structures to transform raw data into decision-ready intelligence. Second, data quality and interoperability challenges can impede the ability to derive reliable insights. If data streams from design, validation, manufacturing, and in-use phases are not harmonized with consistent formats, taxonomies, and metadata, analytical models can yield inconsistent results or require extensive cleansing before any meaningful interpretation is possible. Third, there is often a misalignment between analytics outputs and decision-making processes. Even when insights are generated, if organizational workflows and incentives do not support data-driven action, the value of analytics is diluted. This misalignment can manifest as a preference for intuition over evidence, or as protracted cycles of sign-off that slow the translation of insights into action.
The NI report also draws attention to the broader challenge of data-driven product design and development: a reliance on limited data analytics opportunities and underutilization of test data for guiding design improvements. Test data can be a rich source of truth about how designs fare under real-world conditions, yet it is frequently leveraged insufficiently to inform iterative design changes. When test data remains underutilized, product teams miss a critical feedback mechanism that could shorten development cycles, reduce risk, and enhance product reliability. The consequence is a slower, more expensive path to robust, market-ready products, with fewer opportunities to learn from failures and accelerate improvements.
Taken together, these gaps illuminate a path forward for advanced-strategy organizations. The data suggests that achieving the full benefits of a comprehensive data strategy requires more than technology enhancements; it demands a holistic approach to analytics maturity, data governance, and organizational alignment. It also requires a deliberate emphasis on holistic data integration across the lifecycle and a stronger emphasis on the effective use of test data to inform design decisions. Organizations that address these gaps are more likely to realize the promised gains in production efficiency, faster innovation cycles, and better-informed strategic choices that can withstand competitive pressure and disruption.
AI scaling constraints and enterprise implications
As enterprises ramp up their artificial intelligence initiatives, the NI study highlights persistent constraints that impede rapid, large-scale deployment. Power limitations, rising costs associated with tokenized AI models, and inference delays are shaping the practical realities of enterprise AI adoption. These constraints do not merely complicate implementation; they influence strategic choices about where to invest, which architectures to pursue, and how to balance speed with sustainability. In a market where AI workloads can be resource-intensive, organizations are reevaluating their approaches to model deployment, data management, and governance to ensure that AI systems deliver reliable throughput without unsustainable cost or energy footprints.
Industry leaders are increasingly focused on turning energy use and computational efficiency into strategic levers. The challenge is not simply about increasing compute power, but about architecting AI systems that deliver real throughput gains while maintaining cost discipline and environmental responsibility. This involves exploring the most efficient inference strategies, optimizing data pipelines, and leveraging hardware-software co-design to maximize performance per watt. It also requires a disciplined approach to model management, including stepwise deployment, monitoring, and rollback capabilities to minimize risk and downtime as models scale.
The survey underscores the potential of combining efficiency improvements with governance and architectural innovations to unlock sustainable AI ROI. For example, organizations may pursue strategies that reduce redundancies in data processing, optimize model serving architectures for latency and throughput, and implement robust monitoring to detect and respond to drifting model performance. By aligning AI initiatives with broader business goals and ensuring that data quality and data lineage are well managed, companies can achieve more reliable outputs at a lower cost, even as AI workloads grow in complexity and scale.
A crucial takeaway for executives is that AI scaling is not a single technology problem but an end-to-end operational challenge. It requires alignment across data engineering, platform governance, and domain expertise in manufacturing and product design. The goal is to ensure that AI enables tangible improvements in product development and manufacturing processes without compromising efficiency, cost, or sustainability. In this context, the NI findings point to a broader trend: successful AI adoption at scale depends on building resilient data ecosystems, investing in efficient inference capabilities, and adopting practices that make AI-driven insights actionable across the enterprise.
In practice, this means that organizations should pursue a portfolio of initiatives aimed at increasing information value while controlling cost and energy use. These initiatives include refining data infrastructure to support consistent data collection and lineage, standardizing data models to enable cross-functional analytics, and implementing automated testing and validation workflows that integrate AI insights with engineering and manufacturing decisions. The aim is to create an environment where AI can deliver predictable, scalable benefits across the product lifecycle, rather than a collection of isolated pilots that fail to translate into sustained performance improvements.
Organizational adaptation: from laggards to leaders
Confronted with the data maturity gap, organizations are actively shifting their priorities to address data shortfalls and to reengineer the product lifecycle around data-driven decision-making. The NI findings show a notable shift in spending and focus among different cohorts. Over the most recent twelve months, a striking 70% of organizations operating with limited data strategies have prioritized investments in product data and analytics as a top priority. This demonstrates a recognition that data capability is a foundational driver of improvement, even if existing architectures and governance require enhancement.
In contrast, the more mature players, who already possess robust data foundations, are reorienting their attention toward cutting-edge technologies. Their focus has moved toward adopting advanced capabilities such as machine learning, digital twins, and robotic process automation (RPA). These technologies promise to accelerate learning cycles, improve predictive capabilities, and automate repetitive tasks, enabling teams to concentrate on higher-value work. The emphasis on digital twins, for instance, reflects an understanding that virtual representations of physical systems can support more rapid experimentation, better scenario analysis, and safer, more cost-effective testing that translates into more reliable product designs and production processes.
Industry experts stress that maturation in a product data strategy requires thoughtful planning of the sequence of steps that appropriately address current issues. The recommended approach is to begin by identifying the challenges that demand immediate solutions, then determine the tools required to address those challenges, and finally craft a data strategy that underpins the deployment of those tools. This practical sequence ensures that data initiatives are purpose-built to solve real problems rather than being driven by technology for its own sake. A key framing from NI fellow Mike Santori emphasizes centralization and standardization: product-centric data will be a core part of the enterprise data strategy, offering the granularity needed for analytics while enabling a unified, standardized approach that connects efforts across the organization. This approach ensures that the data strategy evolves into a truly connected, advanced framework that spans the entire company, rather than remaining a collection of isolated efforts.
From a strategic perspective, the survey reveals that a majority of participants — 65% — regard a data strategy as essential to optimizing the product lifecycle. This view highlights a shared understanding that data-driven optimization is central to reducing time-to-market, improving design quality, and delivering products that perform as intended in production and in-use conditions. Concurrently, 46% of respondents express concerns about market share erosion if outdated product lifecycle processes remain unoptimized. This fear reflects a practical risk calculus facing executives who must decide whether to invest in data capabilities now or contend with intensified competitive pressure in the near term.
The organizational shift toward data maturity also points to a broader cultural dimension: the need to cultivate data literacy, incentivize cross-functional collaboration, and align performance metrics with data-driven outcomes. As teams adopt more advanced analytics, the capacity to interpret results, translate insights into action, and coordinate across design, manufacturing, and in-use teams becomes increasingly critical. The NI report implies that success hinges not only on technology upgrades but also on governance reforms, talent development, and organizational alignment that support sustained data-driven progress.
The role of leadership and data governance
Leadership plays a pivotal role in translating data strategy into measurable business value. The NI survey underscores the importance of purposeful, staged progress toward a centralized, enterprise-wide data framework that harmonizes data across the product lifecycle. The recommendations attributed to Mike Santori emphasize a disciplined approach: start by identifying the most pressing challenges that require solutions today; determine the tools and capabilities needed to address those challenges; and then shape a data strategy whose primary function is to support those tools. This approach helps ensure that investments in data infrastructure, analytics capabilities, and governance structures are tightly coupled with concrete business objectives.
According to the survey, a majority of respondents view product-centric data as a critical enabler of analytics at scale. The emphasis on centralized, standardized data within the enterprise signals a strategic pivot away from fragmented, function-specific data practices toward a cohesive data architecture that supports cross-functional analytics. By standardizing data models, governance policies, and analytic processes, organizations can foster collaboration and reduce the friction that often accompanies data-driven initiatives. This is particularly important when trying to integrate diverse data streams from design, validation, manufacturing, and in-use phases, each of which may use different formats, terminologies, and measurement standards. A well-designed governance framework helps ensure data quality, traceability, and accountability, which in turn enhances trust in analytics outputs and the speed with which insights can be operationalized.
The NI findings reveal a clear sense of urgency among leaders. Sixty-five percent of respondents regard data strategy as essential to optimizing the product lifecycle, indicating a broad consensus that data-enabled decision-making is a critical lever for improving performance. At the same time, 46% warn that failing to optimize product lifecycle processes could result in market-share losses within two years. These figures reflect a cautious but determined stance: leaders recognize the value of data, yet they also acknowledge the risk of underinvestment or misallocation if governance and execution are not aligned with strategic priorities. In practice, this means that boards and executives must champion data initiatives with clear governance structures, transparent ownership, and measurable milestones that demonstrate progress toward the overarching objective of a fully integrated product data strategy.
The leadership message is complemented by practical considerations about talent, technology, and process integration. Organizations aiming to mature their data strategies should invest in building capabilities across data engineering, data science, domain expertise in manufacturing and product design, and change management. Equally important is the establishment of a governance model that defines data ownership, data quality standards, and compliance with regulatory and ethical considerations. By fostering a culture that values data-driven decision-making and provides the tools and governance needed to act on insights, leadership can accelerate the transformation from scattered insights to cohesive, enterprise-wide analytics that inform strategic decisions and daily operations.
Technology tools, workflows, and the path to scaling
To translate data strategy into tangible business outcomes, organizations need a robust set of tools and workflows that support end-to-end analytics across the product lifecycle. The NI study highlights the role of advanced technologies such as machine learning, digital twins, and robotic process automation (RPA) in shaping how companies approach product development and manufacturing. The push toward these technologies reflects a broader trend toward embedding analytics directly into the workflows that define how products are designed, tested, produced, and maintained. However, the deployment of these tools must be matched by careful workflow design, governance, and data management practices to realize meaningful improvements in speed, quality, and efficiency.
Machine learning (ML) enables predictive insights, optimization, and rapid experimentation across design and production processes. Digital twins provide a dynamic, virtual representation of physical systems, enabling safer, cost-effective experimentation and scenario planning that can inform design choices and manufacturing strategies before real-world deployment. Robotic process automation (RPA) supports the automation of repetitive, rule-based tasks, freeing human resources for more strategic work and helping to scale analytics and operational improvements across large, complex environments. Together, these technologies can accelerate learning cycles, reduce defects, and improve overall process reliability when integrated with a centralized data strategy and standardized data models.
Yet the deployment of such technologies must be grounded in solid data governance and data quality practices. It is not sufficient to simply acquire ML models or digital twins; organizations must ensure that data feeding these systems is accurate, timely, and properly governed. Data lineage, versioning, and traceability become critical as models are developed, validated, and deployed across multiple teams and stages of the product lifecycle. A disciplined approach to data preparation, feature engineering, model monitoring, and governance helps prevent drift, biases, or misinterpretations that could undermine decision quality or erode trust in AI-driven recommendations.
In addition to technology choices, practical workflow design is essential. This includes establishing standardized data schemas, consistent metadata, and reproducible analytics pipelines that enable cross-functional teams to collaborate effectively. It also requires integrating analytics outputs into decision-making processes in real time or near real time, so insights from ML models or digital twins can influence design iterations, manufacturing adjustments, and post-market actions. The objective is to move from isolated experiments to scalable, repeatable practices that deliver measurable improvements in time-to-market, product quality, and production efficiency. Achieving this level of scale demands not only technical expertise but also a cultural and organizational readiness to adopt data-driven workflows, share learnings across units, and continuously invest in the capabilities required to sustain such a transformation.
Market pressure, strategic priorities, and the need for a unified data vision
The NI survey makes clear that the longer-term viability of product-led growth hinges on the adoption of a unified, enterprise-wide data vision. The findings show that a substantial portion of organizations recognize data strategy as essential to optimizing the product lifecycle, signaling a strategic acknowledgment of data assets as a core driver of performance. At the same time, a significant share of respondents — nearly half — fear market share erosion within a two-year horizon if outdated processes remain unoptimized. This dual sentiment underscores the tension between recognizing data as a strategic asset and executing on it through coordinated, scalable programs.
A unified data vision requires alignment across strategy, technology, and people. Executive teams must translate data ambitions into concrete roadmaps with explicit milestones, budgets, and governance structures. They must ensure that data initiatives are not siloed within IT or data science units but are integrated into product management, engineering, manufacturing, and operations. This cross-functional alignment ensures that analytics outputs inform critical decisions at the points where they matter most — during design trade-offs, process optimization, and field performance evaluation. It also supports a culture of continuous improvement, where data-driven insights become a persistent part of daily work rather than a periodic project with limited reach.
The forward-looking implications are clear. Enterprises that invest in a centralized, enterprise-wide data strategy can expect to unlock more consistent and compelling improvements across the entire product lifecycle. The combination of standardized data governance, integrated analytics, and scalable technology platforms enables organizations to transform insights into rapid, reliable decisions that accelerate time-to-market, enhance product quality, and improve manufacturing efficiency. Conversely, those who delay or fragment their data initiatives risk widening performance gaps, with slower learning cycles, higher costs, and reduced responsiveness to changing market demands.
Practical steps to accelerate data maturity and outcomes
Based on the NI findings and the broader industry context, leaders can pursue a structured pathway to mature their data capabilities and realize the benefits of an advanced product data strategy. The following practical steps lay out a phased approach that can help organizations move from limited to advanced data maturity while delivering measurable outcomes.
-
Assess and map the current data landscape. Begin by cataloging data sources across design, validation, production, and in-use stages. Identify data silos, data quality gaps, and governance gaps that hinder end-to-end analytics. Use this assessment to establish a baseline and a clear understanding of where improvements will yield the largest impact on time-to-market, innovation, and manufacturing efficiency.
-
Define a centralized data architecture. Develop a common data model that harmonizes data across disciplines, enabling cross-functional analytics. Establish data ownership and stewardship roles, data quality standards, and clear policies for data access, security, and privacy. Design data pipelines that reliably ingest, synchronize, and transform data from diverse sources into a unified analytics environment.
-
Prioritize end-to-end analytics initiatives. Focus on analytics projects that connect lifecycle stages, such as correlating design decisions with manufacturing outcomes or linking field performance with validation data. Prioritize initiatives that demonstrate clear ROI in terms of reduced cycle times, improved yield, or enhanced product reliability.
-
Invest in analytics maturity and talent. Build teams with cross-functional expertise in data engineering, data science, and domain knowledge in engineering and manufacturing. Promote data literacy across the organization to ensure that insights are interpretable and actionable by decision-makers in product management, supply chain, and operations.
-
Accelerate test-data utilization for design improvement. Treat test data as a strategic asset and embed its analysis into the design and validation processes. Develop processes to translate test-derived insights into concrete design changes, reducing rework, and shortening development cycles.
-
Adopt advanced technologies in a disciplined manner. Use machine learning, digital twins, and automation tools to accelerate learning and decision-making, but anchor these technologies in a governance framework that ensures data quality, traceability, and accountability. Implement model monitoring and lifecycle management to maintain reliability as conditions evolve.
-
Implement scalable, energy-conscious AI practices. Address power constraints and energy costs by adopting efficient inference strategies, optimized data pipelines, and hardware-aware software design. Seek architecture choices that maximize throughput per watt and reduce environmental impact while preserving performance and cost efficiency.
-
Foster continuous improvement through governance and measurement. Establish dashboards and KPIs that tie data initiatives to core business outcomes. Track progress against milestones, adjust strategies as needed, and communicate value across the organization to sustain executive sponsorship and broad engagement.
-
Build a culture of enterprise-wide data collaboration. Create forums for cross-functional data sharing, insights exchange, and coordinated decision-making. Align incentives and performance metrics with data-driven outcomes to sustain momentum and avoid reversion to siloed practices.
-
Plan for scalable deployment and risk management. Design a deployment strategy that expands analytics capabilities incrementally, with safeguards for data quality, security, and regulatory compliance. Prepare for potential model drift, data quality deterioration, or governance challenges and have contingency plans in place.
-
Tie data strategy to product lifecycle optimization. Ensure that every data initiative is linked to tangible improvements in design efficiency, validation rigor, production throughput, and post-market performance. Demonstrate how data-driven decisions translate into faster time-to-market, higher-quality products, and better customer outcomes.
Conclusion
The NI survey illuminates a critical crossroads for enterprises navigating an increasingly data-driven and competitive landscape. Nearly half of organizations operate with a limited data strategy, relying on product data from a narrow set of functional areas, and they lag behind peers who have established a company-wide, lifecycle-spanning data approach. The performance gaps are evident across a range of metrics, including time-to-market, innovation, productivity, and manufacturing efficiency, underscoring the practical value of an integrated data framework that unifies design, validation, production, and in-use data.
Even among advanced data strategists, the findings reveal meaningful gaps in how data is leveraged, particularly in translating manufacturing, engineering, and in-use data into deeper insights that inform decision-making across the lifecycle. These gaps point to resilience challenges in analytics maturity, data quality, interoperability, and governance — all of which can limit the impact of even strong data initiatives. The constraints facing enterprise AI — power limits, rising token costs, and inference delays — further complicate the path to scalable, sustainable AI-driven transformation. Yet, these constraints also create an opportunity: by elevating data governance, standardizing data models, and integrating analytics into core workflows, organizations can unlock meaningful gains in throughput and ROI while building resilience against future disruptions.
Leadership plays a decisive role in steering this transformation. A deliberate, phased approach — starting with problem identification, followed by tool selection, and culminating in a centralized, standardized data strategy — can help embed data-driven decision-making into the fabric of the enterprise. The survey’s emphasis on the essential nature of data strategy for optimizing the product lifecycle, coupled with the warning about potential market-share losses if processes remain outdated, reinforces the urgency for decisive action. As organizations invest to mature their data capabilities, the path forward centers on creating a unified data vision, embracing end-to-end lifecycle analytics, and integrating advanced technologies in a governance-first framework that supports sustainable, scalable value creation.
In summary, the findings call for a holistic, enterprise-wide commitment to data: a commitment that recognizes data as a strategic asset, aligns people and processes with a standardized data architecture, and couples analytics with actionable workflows that translate insight into execution. By prioritizing end-to-end data across design, validation, production, and in-use stages, and by embracing disciplined AI scaling with attention to energy efficiency and governance, organizations can accelerate innovation, improve operational performance, and protect market position in a rapidly evolving landscape. The future of enterprise product development hinges on the successful realization of a connected, mature data strategy — one that turns data into a true competitive advantage.
