Jim Harris

My name is Jim Harris, I am the Blogger-in-Chief of OCDQ Blog, and an independent consultant, speaker, and freelance writer for hire.

My Services Contact Me
Search OCDQ Blog
Recent Comments

Entries in Business Intelligence (43)

Tuesday
Apr302013

Business Intelligence for Midsize Businesses

Business intelligence is one of those phrases that everyone agrees is something all organizations, regardless of their size, should be doing.  After all, no organization would admit to doing business stupidity.  Nor, I presume, would any vendor admit to selling it.

But not everyone seems to agree on what the phrase means.  Personally, I have always defined business intelligence as the data analytics performed in support of making informed business decisions (i.e., for me, business intelligence = decision support).

Oftentimes, this analytics is performed on data integrated, cleansed, and consolidated into a repository (e.g., a data warehouse).  Other times, it’s performed on a single data set (e.g., a customer information file).  Either way, business decision makers interact with the analytical results via static reports, data visualizations, dynamic dashboards, and ad hoc querying and reporting tools.

But robust business intelligence and analytics solutions used to be perceived as something only implemented by big businesses, as evinced in the big price tags usually associated with them.  However, free and open source software, cloud computingmobile, social, and a variety of as-a-service technologies drove the consumerization of IT, driving down the costs of solutions, enabling small and midsize businesses to afford them.  Additionally, the open data movement lead to a wealth of free public data sets that can be incorporated into business intelligence and analytics solutions (examples can be found at kdnuggets.com/datasets).

Lyndsay Wise, author of the insightful book Using Open Source Platforms for Business Intelligence (to listen to a podcast about the book, click here: OSBI on OCDQ Radio), recently blogged about business intelligence for small and midsize businesses.

Wise advised that “recent market changes have shifted the market in favor of small and midsize businesses.  Before this, most were limited by requirements for large infrastructures, high-cost licensing, and limited solution availability.  With this newly added flexibility and access to lower price points, business intelligence and analytics solutions are no longer out of reach.”

 

This post was written as part of the IBM for Midsize Business program, which provides midsize businesses with the tools, expertise and solutions they need to become engines of a smarter planet. I’ve been compensated to contribute to this program, but the opinions expressed in this post are my own and don’t necessarily represent IBM’s positions, strategies, or opinions.

 

Related Posts

The Big Datastillery

Smart Big Data Adoption for Midsize Businesses

Big Data is not just for Big Businesses

Big Data Lessons from Orbitz

The Graystone Effects of Big Data

Will Big Data be Blinded by Data Science?

Social Business is more than Social Marketing

Social Media Marketing: From Monologues to Dialogues

Social Media for Midsize Businesses

Barriers to Cloud Adoption

Leveraging the Cloud for Application Development

Cloud Computing for Midsize Businesses

Cloud Computing is the New Nimbyism

Devising a Mobile Device Strategy

The Age of the Mobile Device

Word of Mouth has become Word of Data

Information Asymmetry versus Empowered Customers

Talking Business about the Weather

Thursday
Jan102013

Open Source Business Intelligence

OCDQ Radio is a vendor-neutral podcast about data quality and its related disciplines, produced and hosted by Jim Harris.

During this episode, I discuss open source business intelligence (OSBI) with Lyndsay Wise, author of the insightful new book Using Open Source Platforms for Business Intelligence: Avoid Pitfalls and Maximize ROI.

Lyndsay Wise is the President and Founder of WiseAnalytics, an independent analyst firm and consultancy specializing in business intelligence for small and mid-sized organizations.  For more than ten years, Lyndsay Wise has assisted clients in business systems analysis, software selection, and implementation of enterprise applications.

Lyndsay Wise conducts regular research studies, consults, writes articles, and speaks about how to implement a successful business intelligence approach and improving the value of business intelligence within organizations.

 

Open Source Business Intelligence

Additional listening options:

 

Win a copy of the Book

Lyndsay Wise wants to give one OCDQ Radio listener a free copy of Using Open Source Platforms for Business Intelligence.

 

Here is how the book contest will work:

(1) Book Contest Question — Name one of the considerations for evaluating whether OSBI is the right choice for your organization that Lyndsay Wise discussed during this OCDQ Radio episode.

 

(2) Book Contest Deadline — By or before January 31, 2013, Email Jim Harris with your answer to the book contest question.

 

(3) Book Contest Winner — In February 2013, one winner will be randomly selected from the emails containing the answer to the contest question, and Lyndsay Wise will email the winner requesting a postal address for sending a free copy of the book.

 

Related Lyndsay Wise Articles

What You Need to Know about Open Source BI

Open Source BI Considerations and Implications

Do Self-Service and Open Source Co-Exist?

Everything Executives Need to Know about Open Source BI

The Importance of Data Management for Business People

 

Related OCDQ Radio Episodes

Clicking on the link will take you to the episode’s blog post:

  • Studying Data Quality — Guest Gordon Hamilton discusses the key concepts from recommended data quality books, including those which he has implemented in his career as a data quality practitioner.

Tuesday
Dec042012

The Wisdom of Crowds, Friends, and Experts

I recently finished reading the TED Book by Jim Hornthal, A Haystack Full of Needles, which included an overview of the different predictive approaches taken by one of the most common forms of data-driven decision making in the era of big data, namely, the recommendation engines increasingly provided by websites, social networks, and mobile apps.

These recommendation engines primarily employ one of three techniques, choosing to base their data-driven recommendations on the “wisdom” provided by either crowds, friends, or experts.

 

The Wisdom of Crowds

In his book The Wisdom of Crowds, James Surowiecki explained that the four conditions characterizing wise crowds are diversity of opinion, independent thinking, decentralization, and aggregation.  Amazon is a great example of a recommendation engine using this approach by assuming that a sufficiently large population of buyers is a good proxy for your purchasing decisions.

For example, Amazon tells you that people who bought James Surowiecki’s bestselling book also bought Thinking, Fast and Slow by Daniel Kahneman, Crowdsourcing: Why the Power of the Crowd Is Driving the Future of Business by Jeff Howe, and Wikinomics: How Mass Collaboration Changes Everything by Don Tapscott.  However, Amazon neither provides nor possesses knowledge of why people bought all four of these books or qualification of the subject matter expertise of these readers.

However, these concerns, which we could think of as potential data quality issues, and which would be exacerbated within a small amount of transaction data where the eclectic tastes and idiosyncrasies of individual readers would not help us decide what books to buy, within a large amount of transaction data, we achieve the Wisdom of Crowds effect when, taken in aggregate, we receive a general sense of what books we might like to read based on what a diverse group of readers collectively makes popular.

As I blogged about in my post Sometimes it’s Okay to be Shallow, sometimes the aggregated, general sentiment of a large group of unknown, unqualified strangers will be sufficient to effectively make certain decisions.

 

The Wisdom of Friends

Although the influence of our friends and family is the oldest form of data-driven decision making, historically this influence was delivered by word of mouth, which required you to either be there to hear those influential words when they were spoken, or have a large enough network of people you knew that would be able to eventually pass along those words to you.

But the rise of social networking services, such as Twitter and Facebook, has transformed word of mouth into word of data by transcribing our words into short bursts of social data, such as status updates, online reviews, and blog posts.

Facebook “Likes” are a great example of a recommendation engine that uses the Wisdom of Friends, where our decision to buy a book, see a movie, or listen to a song might be based on whether or not our friends like it.  Of course, “friends” is used in a very loose sense in a social network, and not just on Facebook, since it combines strong connections such as actual friends and family, with weak connections such as acquaintances, friends of friends, and total strangers from the periphery of our social network.

Social influence has never ended with the people we know well, as Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler explained in their book Connected: The Surprising Power of Our Social Networks and How They Shape Our Lives.  But the hyper-connected world enabled by the Internet, and further facilitated by mobile devices, has strengthened the social influence of weak connections, and these friends form a smaller crowd whose wisdom is involved in more of our decisions than we may even be aware of.

 

The Wisdom of Experts

Since it’s more common to associate wisdom with expertise, Pandora is a great example of a recommendation engine that uses the Wisdom of Experts.  Pandora used a team of musicologists (professional musicians and scholars with advanced degrees in music theory) to deconstruct more than 800,000 songs into 450 musical elements that make up each performance, including qualities of melody, harmony, rhythm, form, composition, and lyrics, as part of what Pandora calls the Music Genome Project.

As Pandora explains, their methodology uses precisely defined terminology, a consistent frame of reference, redundant analysis, and ongoing quality control to ensure that data integrity remains reliably high, believing that delivering a great radio experience to each and every listener requires an incredibly broad and deep understanding of music.

Essentially, experts form the smallest crowd of wisdom.  Of course, experts are not always right.  At the very least, experts are not right about every one of their predictions.  Nor do experts always agree with other, which is why I imagine that one of the most challenging aspects of the Music Genome Project is getting music experts to consistently apply precisely the same methodology.

Pandora also acknowledges that each individual has a unique relationship with music (i.e., no one else has tastes exactly like yours), and allows you to “Thumbs Up” or “Thumbs Down” songs without affecting other users, producing more personalized results than either the popularity predicted by the Wisdom of Crowds or the similarity predicted by the Wisdom of Friends.

 

The Future of Wisdom

It’s interesting to note that the Wisdom of Experts is the only one of these approaches that relies on what data management and business intelligence professionals would consider a rigorous approach to data quality and decision quality best practices.  But this is also why the Wisdom of Experts is the most time-consuming and expensive approach to data-driven decision making.

In the past, the Wisdom of Crowds and Friends was ignored in data-driven decision making for the simple reason that this potential wisdom wasn’t digitized.  But now, in the era of big data, not only are crowds and friends digitized, but technological advancements combined with cost-effective options via open source (data and software) and cloud computing make these approaches quicker and cheaper than the Wisdom of Experts.  And despite the potential data quality and decision quality issues, the Wisdom of Crowds and/or Friends is proving itself a viable option for more categories of data-driven decision making.

I predict that the future of wisdom will increasingly become an amalgamation of experts, friends, and crowds, with the data and techniques from all three potential sources of wisdom often acknowledged as contributors to data-driven decision making.

 

Related Posts

Sometimes it’s Okay to be Shallow

Word of Mouth has become Word of Data

The Wisdom of the Social Media Crowd

Data Management: The Next Generation

Exercise Better Data Management

Darth Vader, Big Data, and Predictive Analytics

Data-Driven Intuition

The Big Data Theory

Finding a Needle in a Needle Stack

Big Data, Predictive Analytics, and the Ideal Chronicler

The Limitations of Historical Analysis

Magic Elephants, Data Psychics, and Invisible Gorillas

OCDQ Radio - Data Quality and Big Data

Big Data: Structure and Quality

HoardaBytes and the Big Data Lebowski

The Data-Decision Symphony

OCDQ Radio - Decision Management Systems

A Tale of Two Datas

Thursday
Oct042012

A Tale of Two Datas

Is big data more than just lots and lots of data?  Is big data unstructured and not-so-big data structured?  Malcolm Chisholm explored these questions in his recent Information Management column, where he posited that there are, in fact, two datas.

“One type of data,” Chisholm explained,  “represents non-material entities in vast computerized ecosystems that humans create and manage.  The other data consists of observations of events, which may concern material or non-material entities.”

Providing an example of the first type, Chisholm explained, “my bank account is not a physical thing at all; it is essentially an agreed upon idea between myself, the bank, the legal system, and the regulatory authorities.  It only exists insofar as it is represented, and it is represented in data.  The balance in my bank account is not some estimate with a positive and negative tolerance; it is exact.  The non-material entities of the financial sector are orderly human constructs.  Because they are orderly, we can more easily manage them in computerized environments.”

The orderly human constructs that are represented in data, in the stories told by data (including the stories data tell about us and the stories we tell data) is one of my favorite topics.  In our increasingly data-constructed world, it’s important to occasionally remind ourselves that data and the real world are not the same thing, especially when data represents non-material entities since, with the possible exception of Makers using 3-D printers, data-represented entities do not re-materialize into the real world.

Describing the second type, Chisholm explained, “a measurement is usually a comparison of a characteristic using some criteria, a count of certain instances, or the comparison of two characteristics.  A measurement can generally be quantified, although sometimes it’s expressed in a qualitative manner.  I think that big data goes beyond mere measurement, to observations.”

Chisholm called the first type the Data of Representation, and the second type the Data of Observation.

The data of representation tends to be structured, in the relational sense, but doesn’t need to be (e.g., graph databases) and the data of observation tends to be unstructured, but it can also be structured (e.g., the structured observations generated by either a data profiling tool analyzing structured relational tables or flat files, or a word-counting algorithm analyzing unstructured text).

Structured and unstructured,” Chisholm concluded, “describe form, not essence, and I suggest that representation and observation describe the essences of the two datas.  I would also submit that both datas need different data management approaches.  We have a good idea what these are for the data of representation, but much less so for the data of observation.”

I agree that there are two types of data (i.e., representation and observation, not big and not-so-big) and that different data uses will require different data management approaches.  Although data modeling is still important and data quality still matters, how much data modeling and data quality is needed before data can be effectively used for specific business purposes will vary.

In order to move our discussions forward regarding “big data” and its data management and business intelligence challenges, we have to stop fiercely defending our traditional perspectives about structure and quality in order to effectively manage both the form and essence of the two datas.  We also have to stop fiercely defending our traditional perspectives about data analytics, since there will be some data use cases where depth and detailed analysis may not be necessary to provide business insight.

 

A Tale of Two Datas

In conclusion, and with apologies to Charles Dickens and his A Tale of Two Cities, I offer the following A Tale of Two Datas:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.
It was the age of Structured Data, it was the age of Unstructured Data.
It was the epoch of SQL, it was the epoch of NoSQL.
It was the season of Representation, it was the season of Observation.
It was the spring of Big Data Myth, it was the winter of Big Data Reality.
We had everything before us, we had nothing before us,
We were all going direct to hoarding data, we were all going direct the other way.
In short, the period was so far like the present period, that some of its noisiest authorities insisted on its being signaled, for Big Data or for not-so-big data, in the superlative degree of comparison only.

Related Posts

HoardaBytes and the Big Data Lebowski

The Idea of Order in Data

The Most August Imagination

Song of My Data

The Lies We Tell Data

Our Increasingly Data-Constructed World

Plato’s Data

OCDQ Radio - Demystifying Master Data Management

OCDQ Radio - Data Quality and Big Data

Big Data: Structure and Quality

Swimming in Big Data

Sometimes it’s Okay to be Shallow

Darth Vader, Big Data, and Predictive Analytics

The Big Data Theory

Finding a Needle in a Needle Stack

Exercise Better Data Management

Magic Elephants, Data Psychics, and Invisible Gorillas

Why Can’t We Predict the Weather?

Data and its Relationships with Quality

A Tale of Two Q’s

A Tale of Two G’s

Wednesday
Aug012012

Exercise Better Data Management

Recently on Twitter, Daragh O Brien and I discussed his proposed concept.  “After Big Data,” Daragh tweeted, “we will inevitably begin to see the rise of MOData as organizations seek to grab larger chunks of data and digest it.  What is MOData?  It’s MO’Data, as in MOre Data. Or Morbidly Obese Data.  Only good data quality and data governance will determine which.”

Daragh asked if MO’Data will be the Big Data Killer.  I said only if MO’Data doesn’t include MO’BusinessInsight, MO’DataQuality, and MO’DataPrivacy (i.e., more business insight, more data quality, and more data privacy).

“But MO’Data is about more than just More Data,” Daragh replied.  “It’s about avoiding Morbidly Obese Data that clogs data insight and data quality, etc.”

I responded that More Data becomes Morbidly Obese Data only if we don’t exercise better data management practices.

Agreeing with that point, Daragh replied, “Bring on MOData and the Pilates of Data Quality and Data Governance.”

To slightly paraphrase lines from one of my favorite movies — Airplane! — the Cloud is getting thicker and the Data is getting laaaaarrrrrger.  Surely I know well that growing data volumes is a serious issue — but don’t call me Shirley.

Whether you choose to measure it in terabytes, petabytes, exabytes, HoardaBytes, or how much reality bites, the truth is we were consuming way more than our recommended daily allowance of data long before the data management industry took a tip from McDonald’s and put the word “big” in front of its signature sandwich.  (Oh great . . . now I’m actually hungry for a Big Mac.)

But nowadays with silos replicating data, as well as new data, and new types of data, being created and stored on a daily basis, our data is resembling the size of Bob Parr in retirement, making it seem like not even Mr. Incredible in his prime possessed the super strength needed to manage all of our data.  Those were references to the movie The Incredibles, where Mr. Incredible was a superhero who, after retiring into civilian life under the alias of Bob Parr, elicits the observation from this superhero costume tailor: “My God, you’ve gotten fat.”  Yes, I admit not even Helen Parr (aka Elastigirl) could stretch that far for a big data joke.

 

A Healthier Approach to Big Data

Although Daragh’s concerns about morbidly obese data are valid, no superpowers (or other miracle exceptions) are needed to manage all of our data.  In fact, it’s precisely when we are so busy trying to manage all of our data that we hoard countless bytes of data without evaluating data usage, gathering data requirements, or planning for data archival.  It’s like we are trying to lose weight by eating more and exercising less, i.e., consuming more data and exercising less data quality and data governance.  As Daragh said, only good data quality and data governance will determine whether we get more data or morbidly obese data.

Losing weight requires a healthy approach to both diet and exercise.  A healthy approach to diet includes carefully choosing the food you consume and carefully controlling your portion size.  A healthy approach to exercise includes a commitment to exercise on a regular basis at a sufficient intensity level without going overboard by spending several hours a day, every day, at the gym.

Swimming is a great form of exercise, but swimming in big data without having a clear business objective before you jump into the pool is like telling your boss that you didn’t get any work done because you decided to spend all day working out at the gym.

Carefully choosing the data you consume and carefully controlling your data portion size is becoming increasingly important since big data is forcing us to revisit information overload.  However, the main reason that traditional data management practices often become overwhelmed by big data is because traditional data management practices are not always the right approach.

We need to acknowledge that some big data use cases differ considerably from traditional ones.  Data modeling is still important and data quality still matters, but how much data modeling and data quality is needed before big data can be effectively used for business purposes will vary.  In order to move the big data discussion forward, we have to stop fiercely defending our traditional perspectives about structure and quality.  We also have to stop fiercely defending our traditional perspectives about analytics, since there will be some big data use cases where depth and detailed analysis may not be necessary to provide business insight.

 

Better than Big or More

Jim Ericson explained that your data is big enough.  Rich Murnane explained that bigger isn’t better, better is better.  Although big data may indeed be followed by more data that doesn’t necessarily mean we require more data management in order to prevent more data from becoming morbidly obese data.  I think that we just need to exercise better data management.

 

Related Posts

OCDQ Radio - Saving Private Data

OCDQ Radio - The Blue Box of Information Quality

Quality is the Higgs Field of Data

Are you turning Ugly Data into Cute Information?

Big Data Lessons from Orbitz

The Graystone Effects of Big Data

Will Big Data be Blinded by Data Science?

Our Increasingly Data-Constructed World

OCDQ Radio - Data Quality and Big Data

Magic Elephants, Data Psychics, and Invisible Gorillas

HoardaBytes and the Big Data Lebowski

Big Data el Memorioso

Information Overload Revisited

The Big Data Collider

OCDQ Radio - Big Data and Big Analytics

What Magic Tricks teach us about Data Science

What Mozart for Babies teaches us about Data Science

Sometimes it’s Okay to be Shallow

Big Data: Structure and Quality

The Big Data Theory

Swimming in Big Data

Why Can’t We Predict the Weather?

Thursday
Mar082012

Data Quality and Big Data 

OCDQ Radio is a vendor-neutral podcast about data quality and its related disciplines, produced and hosted by Jim Harris.

This is Part 2 of 2 from my recent discussion with Tom Redman.  In this episode, Tom and I discuss data quality and big data, including if data quality matters less in larger data sets, if statistical outliers represent business insights or data quality issues, statistical sampling errors versus measurement calibration errors, mistaking signal for noise (i.e., good data for bad data), and whether or not the principles and practices of true “data scientists” will truly be embraced by an organization’s business leaders.

Dr. Thomas C. Redman (the “Data Doc”) is an innovator, advisor, and teacher.  He was first to extend quality principles to data and information in the late 80s.  Since then he has crystallized a body of tools, techniques, roadmaps and organizational insights that help organizations make order-of-magnitude improvements.

More recently Tom has developed keen insights into the nature of data and formulated the first comprehensive approach to “putting data to work.”  Taken together, these enable organizations to treat data as assets of virtually unlimited potential.

Tom has personally helped dozens of leaders and organizations better understand data and data quality and start their data programs.  He is a sought-after lecturer and the author of dozens of papers and four books.  The most recent, Data Driven: Profiting from Your Most Important Business Asset (Harvard Business Press, 2008) was a Library Journal best buy of 2008.

Prior to forming Navesink Consulting Group in 1996, Tom conceived the Data Quality Lab at AT&T Bell Laboratories in 1987 and led it until 1995.  Tom holds a Ph.D. in statistics from Florida State University. He holds two patents.

 

Data Quality and Big Data

Additional listening options:

 

Related Posts

Bayesian Data-Driven Decision Making

Magic Elephants, Data Psychics, and Invisible Gorillas

Big Data el Memorioso

Neither the I Nor the T is Magic

Information Overload Revisited

HoardaBytes and the Big Data Lebowski

WYSIWYG and WYSIATI

The Speed of Decision

The Data-Decision Symphony

A Decision Needle in a Data Haystack

The Big Data Collider

Dot Collectors and Dot Connectors

 

Related OCDQ Radio Episodes

Clicking on the link will take you to the episode’s blog post:

  • Organizing for Data Quality — Guest Tom Redman (aka the “Data Doc”) discusses how your organization should approach data quality, including his call to action for your role in the data revolution.

Tuesday
Feb212012

Magic Elephants, Data Psychics, and Invisible Gorillas

This blog post is sponsored by the Enterprise CIO Forum and HP.

A recent Forbes article predicts Big Data will be a $50 billion market by 2017, and Michael Friedenberg recently blogged how the rise of big data is generating buzz about Hadoop (which I call the Magic Elephant): “It certainly looks like the Holy Grail for organizing unstructured data, so it’s no wonder everyone is jumping on this bandwagon.  So get ready for Hadoopalooza 2012.”

John Burke recently blogged about the role of big data helping CIOs “figure out how to handle the new, the unusual, and the unexpected as an opportunity to focus more clearly on how to bring new levels of order to their traditional structured data.”

As I have previously blogged, many big data proponents (especially the Big Data Lebowski vendors selling Hadoop solutions) extol its virtues as if big data provides clairvoyant business insight, as if big data was the Data Psychic of the Information Age.

But a recent New York Times article opened with the story of a statistician working for a large retail chain being asked by his marketing colleagues: “If we wanted to figure out if a customer is pregnant, even if she didn’t want us to know, can you do that?” As Eric Siegel of Predictive Analytics World is quoted in the article, “we’re living through a golden age of behavioral research.  It’s amazing how much we can figure out about how people think now.”

So, perhaps calling big data psychic is not so far-fetched after all.  However, the potential of predictive analytics exemplifies why one of the biggest implications about big data is the data privacy concerns it raises.

Although it’s amazing (and scary) how much the Data Psychic can figure out about how we think (and work, shop, vote, love), it’s equally amazing (and scary) how much Psychology is figuring out about how we think, how we behave, and how we decide.

As I recently blogged about WYSIATI (“what you see is all there is” from Daniel Kahneman’s book Thinking, Fast and Slow), when you are using big data to make business decisions, what you are looking for can greatly influence what you are looking at (and vice versa).  But this natural human tendency could cause you miss the Invisible Gorilla walking across your screen.

If you are unfamiliar with that psychology experiment, which was created by Christopher Chabris and Daniel Simons, authors of the book The Invisible Gorilla: How Our Intuitions Deceive Us, then I recommend going to theinvisiblegorilla.com/videos.html. (By the way, before I was familiar with its premise, the first time I watched the video, I did not see the guy in the gorilla suit, and now when I watch the video, seeing the “invisible gorilla” distracts me, causing me to not count the number of passes correctly.)

In his book Incognito: The Secret Lives of the Brain, David Eagleman explained how our brain samples just a small bit of the physical world, making time-saving assumptions and seeing only as well as it needs to.  As our eyes interrogate the world, they optimize their strategy for the incoming data, arbitrating a battle between the conflicting information.  What we see is not what is really out there, but instead only a moment-by-moment version of which perception is winning over the others.  Our perception works not by building up bits of captured data, but instead by matching our expectations to the incoming sensory data.

I don’t doubt the Magic Elephants and Data Psychics provide the potential to envision and analyze almost anything happening within the complex and constantly changing business world — as well as the professional and personal lives of the people in it.

But I am concerned that information optimization driven by the biases of our human intuition and perception will only match our expectations to those fast-moving large volumes of various data, thereby causing us to not see many of the Invisible Gorillas.

Although this has always been a business intelligence concern, as technological advancements improve our data analytical tools, we must not lose sight of the fact that tools and data remain only as effective (and as beneficent) as the humans who wield them.

This blog post is sponsored by the Enterprise CIO Forum and HP.

 

Related Posts

Big Data el Memorioso

Neither the I Nor the T is Magic

Information Overload Revisited

HoardaBytes and the Big Data Lebowski

WYSIWYG and WYSIATI

The Speed of Decision

The Data-Decision Symphony

A Decision Needle in a Data Haystack

The Big Data Collider

Dot Collectors and Dot Connectors

DQ-View: Data Is as Data Does

Data, Information, and Knowledge Management

Tuesday
Feb072012

Decision Management Systems

OCDQ Radio is a vendor-neutral podcast about data quality and its related disciplines, produced and hosted by Jim Harris.

During this episode, I discuss decision management with James Taylor, author of the new book Decision Management Systems: A Practical Guide to Using Business Rules and Predictive Analytics.

James Taylor is the CEO of Decision Management Solutions, and the leading expert in Decision Management Systems, which are active participants in improving business results by applying business rules, predictive analytics, and optimization technologies to address the toughest issues facing businesses today, and changing the way organizations are doing business.

James Taylor has led Decision Management efforts for leading companies in insurance, banking, health management, and telecommunications.  Decision Management Solutions works with clients to improve their business by applying analytics and business rules technology to automate and improve decisions.  Clients range from start-ups and software companies to major North American insurers, a travel company, the health management division of a major healthcare company, one of Europe’s largest banks, and several major decision management technology vendors.

 

Decision Management Systems

Additional listening options:

 

Win a copy of the Book

James Taylor wants to give one OCDQ Radio listener a free copy of Decision Management Systems: A Practical Guide to Using Business Rules and Predictive Analytics

Here is how the book contest will work:

(1) Book Contest Question — Name at least one of the four principles of decision management systems that was described by James Taylor during this OCDQ Radio episode.

 

(2) Book Contest Deadline — By or before February 29, 2012, Email Jim Harris with your answer to the book contest question.

 

(3) Book Contest Winner — In March 2012, one winner will be randomly selected from the emails containing the correct answer to the contest question, and James Taylor (or his publisher) will email the winner requesting a shipping address for the book.

 

Related Posts

Dot Collectors and Dot Connectors

Bayesian Data-Driven Decision Making

The Speed of Decision

The Big Data Collider

Decision-Driven Data Management

Satisficing Data Quality

The Data that Supported the Decision

 

Related OCDQ Radio Episodes

Clicking on the link will take you to the episode’s blog post:

Tuesday
Jan172012

Dot Collectors and Dot Connectors

The attention blindness inherent in the digital age often leads to a debate about multitasking, which many claim impairs our ability to solve complex problems.  Therefore, we often hear that we need to adopt monotasking, i.e., we need to eliminate all possible distractions and focus our attention on only one task at a time.

However, during the recent Harvard Business Review podcast The Myth of Monotasking, Cathy Davidson, author of the new book Now You See It: How the Brain Science of Attention Will Transform the Way We Live, Work, and Learn, explained how “the moment that you start not paying attention fully to the task at hand, you actually start seeing other things that your attention would have missed.”  Although Davidson acknowledges that attention blindness is a serious problem, she explained that there really is no such thing as monotasking.  Modern neuroscience research has revealed that the human brain is, in fact, always multitasking.  Furthermore, she explained how multitasking can be extremely useful for a new and expansive form of attention.

“We all see selectively, but we don’t select the same things to see,” Davidson explained.  “So if we can learn to work together, we can actually account for, and productively work around, our own individual attention blindness by seeing collaboratively in a way that compensates for that blindness.”

During the podcast, an analogy was made that focusing attention on specific tasks can result in a lot of time spent collecting dots without spending enough time connecting those dots.  This point caused me to ponder the division of organizational labor that has historically existed between the dot collection of data management, which focuses on aspects such as data integrity and data quality, and the dot connection of business intelligence, which focuses on aspects such as data analysis and data visualization.

I think most data management professionals are dot collectors since it often seems like they spend a lot of their time, money, and attention on collecting (and profiling, modeling, cleansing, transforming, matching, and otherwise managing) data dots.

But since data’s value comes from data’s usefulness, merely collecting data dots doesn’t mean anything if you cannot connect those dots into meaningful patterns that enable your organization to take action or otherwise support your business activities.

So I think most business intelligence professionals are dot connectors since it often seems like they spend a lot of their time, money, and attention on connecting (and querying, aggregating, reporting, visualizing, and otherwise analyzing) data dots.

However, the attention blindness of data management and business intelligence professionals means that they see selectively, often intentionally selecting to not see the same things.  But as more of our personal and professional lives become digitized and pixelated, the big picture of the business world is inundated with the multifaceted challenges of big data, where the fast-moving large volumes of varying data are transforming the way we have to view traditional data management and business intelligence.

We need to replace our perspective of data management and business intelligence as separate monotasking activities with an expansive form of organizational multitasking where the dot collectors and dot connectors work together more collaboratively.

 

Related Posts

Channeling My Inner Beagle: The Case for Hyperactivity

Mind the Gap

The Wisdom of the Social Media Crowd

No Datum is an Island of Serendip

DQ-View: Data Is as Data Does

The Real Data Value is Business Insight

Information Overload Revisited

Neither the I Nor the T is Magic

The Big Data Collider

OCDQ Radio - Big Data and Big Analytics

OCDQ Radio - So Long 2011, and Thanks for All the . . .

The Interconnected User Interface

Tuesday
Jan032012

Best OCDQ Blog Posts of 2011

Welcome to my roundup of the best blog posts published on the Obsessive-Compulsive Data Quality (OCDQ) blog during 2011.

My selections were based on a pseudo-scientific, quasi-statistical combination of page views, comments, and re-tweets (as well as choosing a few of my personal favorites).  Instead of ordering the posts chronologically, I decided to organize them by theme.

 

The Metadata Trilogy

Although it has an incredibly important role to play in data quality and its related disciplines, I don’t write about metadata very often.  But the reader feedback that I received lead me to writing three blog posts about metadata in the span of a few weeks:

  • The Metadata Crisis — There is a running debate within many organizations over the meaning of commonly used terms, which complicates what on the surface seem like straightforward business questions.
  • The Metadata Continuum — There is a continuum, where at one end we have the uniformity of controlled vocabularies, and at the other end we have the flexibility of chaotic folksonomies.  However, both flexibility and uniformity provide value.
  • You Say Potato and I Say Tater Tot — The demarcations of the borders between metadata, data, and information are important, but sometimes difficult to discern.  In this post, I offer an explanation about these demarcations using potatoes.

 

The Data Governance Star Wars (one less than a) Trilogy

In June, Rob Karel of Forrester Research and I used a Star Wars themed blog mock debate to take on one of data governance’s biggest challenges — how to balance bureaucracy and business agility.  Gwen Thomas of the Data Governance Institute joined Rob and I to continue the discussion during a special, extended, and Star Wars themed episode of OCDQ Radio:

  • Data Governance Star Wars on OCDQ Radio — In Part 1, Rob Karel and I discuss our blog mock debate, which is followed by a brief Star Wars themed intermission, and then in Part 2, Gwen Thomas joins us to provide her excellent insights.

 

Although not Star Wars themed, here are some additional Best OCDQ Blog Posts of 2011 on the topic of data governance:

  • Data Governance and the Adjacent Possible — It’s important to demonstrate that some data governance policies reflect existing best practices, which helps reduce resistance to change, and therefore I advise: “If it ain’t broke, bricolage it.”
  • Aristotle, Data Governance, and Lead Rulers — Well-constructed data governance policies are like lead rulers — flexible rules that empower us with an understanding of the principle of the policy, and how to enforce it in a particular context.
  • The Stakeholder’s Dilemma — There will be times when sacrifices for the long-term greater good will require that stakeholders either contribute more resources during the current phase, or receive fewer benefits from its deliverables.
  • Beware the Data Governance Ides of March — My dramatized warning about relying too much on the top-down approach to implementing data governance — and especially if your organization has any data stewards named Brutus or Cassius.

 

OCDQ Radio

In June, I launched OCDQ Radio, which is a vendor-neutral podcast about data quality and the audio complement to this blog, providing me with a platform for recorded discussions with the great folks working in the data management industry.  So far, there have been 21 episodes of OCDQ Radio, including 22 guests from 7 countries.  Here are a few of the most popular episodes:

  • The Fall Back Recap Show — A look back at the Best of OCDQ Radio, including discussions about Data, Information, Business-IT Collaboration, Change Management, Big Analytics, Data Governance, and the Data Revolution.
  • Organizing for Data Quality — Guest Tom Redman (aka the “Data Doc”) discusses how your organization should approach data quality, including his call to action for your role in the data revolution.
  • Studying Data Quality — Guest Gordon Hamilton discusses the key concepts from recommended data quality books, including those which he has implemented in his career as a data quality practitioner.
  • Social Media Strategy — Guest Crysta Anderson of IBM Initiate explains social media strategy and content marketing, including three recommended practices: (1) Listen intently, (2) Communicate succinctly, and (3) Have fun.

 

The Best of the Rest

  • DQ-View: Talking about DataDQ-View video discussion about how data professionals should talk about data when invited to participate in business discussions within their organizations.
  • The Speed of Decision — Examines the constraints that time puts on data-driven decision making, pondering whether decision speed is more important than data quality and decision quality.
  • The Data Cold War — Examines how Google and Facebook have performed the Master Data Management Magic Trick and socialized data (“Information wants to be free!”) in order to capitalize data as a true corporate asset.
  • A Farscape Analogy for Data Quality — Ponders whether data is not viewed as an asset because data has so thoroughly pervaded the enterprise that data has become invisible to those who are so dependent upon its quality.
  • No Datum is an Island of Serendip — Our organizations need to create collaborative environments that foster serendipitous connections bringing all of our business units and people together around our shared data assets.

 

Thank You for Reading OCDQ Blog in 2011

In 2011, the Obsessive-Compulsive Data Quality (OCDQ) blog published 112 posts, which received 130,000 total page views, averaging 350 page views and 150 unique visitors a day.

Thank you for reading OCDQ Blog in 2011.  Your readership was deeply appreciated.

 

Related Posts

So Long 2011, and Thanks for All the . . . – The OCDQ Radio 2011 Year in Review

2011 Quarterly Review of the Data Roundtable (Part 3)

2011 Quarterly Review of the Data Roundtable (Part 2)

2011 Quarterly Review of the Data Roundtable (Part 1)

Commendable Comments (Part 10) – The 300th OCDQ Blog Post

730 Days and 264 Blog Posts Later – The Second Blogiversary of OCDQ Blog

OCDQ Blog Bicentennial – The 200th OCDQ Blog Post

Commendable Comments (Part 5) – The 100th OCDQ Blog Post

The Best Data Quality Blog Posts of 2010

Thursday
Dec292011

So Long 2011, and Thanks for All the . . .

OCDQ Radio is a vendor-neutral podcast about data quality and its related disciplines, produced and hosted by Jim Harris.

Don’t Panic!  Welcome to the mostly harmless OCDQ Radio 2011 Year in Review episode.  During this approximately 42 minute episode, I recap the data-related highlights of 2011 in a series of sometimes serious, sometimes funny, segments, as well as make wacky and wildly inaccurate data-related predictions about 2012.

Special thanks to my guests Jarrett Goldfedder, who discusses Big Data, Nicola Askham, who discusses Data Governance, and Daragh O Brien, who discusses Data Privacy.  Additional thanks to Rich Murnane and Dylan Jones.  And Deep Thanks to that frood Douglas Adams, who always knew where his towel was, and who wrote The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy.

 

So Long 2011, and Thanks for All the . . .

Additional listening options:

 

Previous OCDQ Radio Episodes

Clicking on the link will take you to the episode’s blog post:

Monday
Dec052011

There is No Such Thing as a Root Cause

Root cause analysis.  Most people within the industry, myself included, often discuss the importance of determining the root cause of data governance and data quality issues.  However, the complex cause and effect relationships underlying an issue means that when an issue is encountered, often you are only seeing one of the numerous effects of its root cause (or causes).

In my post The Root! The Root! The Root Cause is on Fire!, I poked fun at those resistant to root cause analysis with the lyrics:

The Root! The Root! The Root Cause is on Fire!
We don’t want to determine why, just let the Root Cause burn.
Burn, Root Cause, Burn!

However, I think that the time is long overdue for even me to admit the truth — There is No Such Thing as a Root Cause.

Before you charge at me with torches and pitchforks for having an Abby Normal brain, please allow me to explain.

 

Defect Prevention, Mouse Traps, and Spam Filters

Some advocates of defect prevention claim that zero defects is not only a useful motivation, but also an attainable goal.  In my post The Asymptote of Data Quality, I quoted Daniel Pink’s book Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us:

“Mastery is an asymptote.  You can approach it.  You can home in on it.  You can get really, really, really close to it.  But you can never touch it.  Mastery is impossible to realize fully.

The mastery asymptote is a source of frustration.  Why reach for something you can never fully attain?

But it’s also a source of allure.  Why not reach for it?  The joy is in the pursuit more than the realization.

In the end, mastery attracts precisely because mastery eludes.”

The mastery of defect prevention is sometimes distorted into a belief in data perfection, into a belief that we can not just build a better mousetrap, but we can build a mousetrap that could catch all the mice, or that by placing a mousetrap in our garage, which prevents mice from entering via the garage, we somehow also prevent mice from finding another way into our house.

Obviously, we can’t catch all the mice.  However, that doesn’t mean we should let the mice be like Pinky and the Brain:

Pinky: “Gee, Brain, what do you want to do tonight?”

The Brain: “The same thing we do every night, Pinky — Try to take over the world!”

My point is that defect prevention is not the same thing as defect elimination.  Defects evolve.  An excellent example of this is spam.  Even conservative estimates indicate almost 80% of all e-mail sent world-wide is spam.  A similar percentage of blog comments are spam, and spam generating bots are quite prevalent on Twitter and other micro-blogging and social networking services.  The inconvenient truth is that as we build better and better spam filters, spammers create better and better spam.

Just as mousetraps don’t eliminate mice and spam filters don’t eliminate spam, defect prevention doesn’t eliminate defects.

However, mousetraps, spam filters, and defect prevention are essential proactive best practices.

 

There are No Lines of Causation — Only Loops of Correlation

There are no root causes, only strong correlations.  And correlations are strengthened by continuous monitoring.  Believing there are root causes means believing continuous monitoring, and by extension, continuous improvement, has an end point.  I call this the defect elimination fallacy, which I parodied in song in my post Imagining the Future of Data Quality.

Knowing there are only strong correlations means knowing continuous improvement is an infinite feedback loop.  A practical example of this reality comes from data-driven decision making, where:

  1. Better Business Performance is often correlated with
  2. Better Decisions, which, in turn, are often correlated with
  3. Better Data, which is precisely why Better Decisions with Better Data is foundational to Business Success — however . . .

This does not mean that we can draw straight lines of causation between (3) and (1), (3) and (2), or (2) and (1).

Despite our preference for simplicity over complexity, if bad data was the root cause of bad decisions and/or bad business performance, every organization would never be profitable, and if good data was the root cause of good decisions and/or good business performance, every organization could always be profitable.  Even if good data was a root cause, not just a correlation, and even when data perfection is temporarily achieved, the effects would still be ephemeral because not only do defects evolve, but so does the business world.  This evolution requires an endless revolution of continuous monitoring and improvement.

Many organizations implement data quality thresholds to close the feedback loop evaluating the effectiveness of their data management and data governance, but few implement decision quality thresholds to close the feedback loop evaluating the effectiveness of their data-driven decision making.

The quality of a decision is determined by the business results it produces, not the person who made the decision, the quality of the data used to support the decision, or even the decision-making technique.  Of course, the reality is that business results are often not immediate and may sometimes be contingent upon the complex interplay of multiple decisions.

Even though evaluating decision quality only establishes a correlation, and not a causation, between the decision execution and its business results, it is still essential to continuously monitor data-driven decision making.

Although the business world will never be totally predictable, we can not turn a blind eye to the need for data-driven decision making best practices, or the reality that no best practice can eliminate the potential for poor data quality and decision quality, nor the potential for poor business results even despite better data quality and decision quality.  Central to continuous improvement is the importance of closing the feedback loops that make data-driven decisions more transparent through better monitoring, allowing the organization to learn from its decision-making mistakes, and make adjustments when necessary.

We need to connect the dots of better business performance, better decisions, and better data by drawing loops of correlation.

 

Decision-Data Feedback Loop

Continuous improvement enables better decisions with better data, which drives better business performance — as long as you never stop looping the Decision-Data Feedback Loop, and start accepting that there is no such thing as a root cause.

I discuss this, and other aspects of data-driven decision making, in my DataFlux white paper, which is available for download (registration required) using the following link: Decision-Driven Data Management

 

Related Posts

The Root! The Root! The Root Cause is on Fire!

Bayesian Data-Driven Decision Making

The Role of Data Quality Monitoring in Data Governance

The Circle of Quality

Oughtn’t you audit?

The Dichotomy Paradox, Data Quality and Zero Defects

The Asymptote of Data Quality

To Our Data Perfectionists

Imagining the Future of Data Quality

What going to the Dentist taught me about Data Quality

DQ-Tip: “There is No Such Thing as Data Accuracy...”

The HedgeFoxian Hypothesis

Thursday
Dec012011

Bayesian Data-Driven Decision Making

In his book Data Driven: Profiting from Your Most Important Business Asset, Thomas Redman recounts the story of economist John Maynard Keynes, who, when asked what he does when new data is presented that does not support his earlier decision, responded: “I change my opinion.  What do you do?”

“This is the way good decision makers behave,” Redman explained.  “They know that a newly made decision is but the first step in its execution.  They regularly and systematically evaluate how well a decision is proving itself in practice by acquiring new data.  They are not afraid to modify their decisions, even admitting they are wrong and reversing course if the facts demand it.”

Since he has a PhD in statistics, it’s not surprising that Redman explained effective data-driven decision making using Bayesian statistics, which is “an important branch of statistics that differs from classic statistics in the way it makes inferences based on data.  One of its advantages is that it provides an explicit means to quantify uncertainty, both a priori, that is, in advance of the data, and a posteriori, in light of the data.”

Good decision makers, Redman explained, follow at least three Bayesian principles:

  1. They bring as much of their prior experience as possible to bear in formulating their initial decision spaces and determining the sorts of data they will consider in making the decision.
  2. For big, important decisions, they adopt decision criteria that minimize the maximum risk.
  3. They constantly evaluate new data to determine how well a decision is working out, and they do not hesitate to modify the decision as needed.

A key concept of statistical process control and continuous improvement is the importance of closing the feedback loop that allows a process to monitor itself, learn from its mistakes, and adjust when necessary.

The importance of building feedback loops into data-driven decision making is too often ignored.

I discuss this, and other aspects of data-driven decision making, in my DataFlux white paper, which is available for download (registration required) using the following link: Decision-Driven Data Management

 

Related Posts

Decision-Driven Data Management

The Speed of Decision

The Big Data Collider

A Decision Needle in a Data Haystack

The Data-Decision Symphony

Thaler’s Apples and Data Quality Oranges

Satisficing Data Quality

Data Confabulation in Business Intelligence

The Data that Supported the Decision

Data Psychedelicatessen

OCDQ Radio - Big Data and Big Analytics

OCDQ Radio - Good-Enough Data for Fast-Enough Decisions

The Circle of Quality

A Farscape Analogy for Data Quality

OCDQ Radio - Organizing for Data Quality

Thursday
Nov172011

The Speed of Decision

In a previous post, I used the Large Hadron Collider as a metaphor for big data and big analytics where the creative destruction caused by high-velocity collisions of large volumes of varying data attempt to reveal elementary particles of business intelligence.

Since recent scientific experiments have sparked discussion about the possibility of exceeding the speed of light, in this blog post I examine whether it’s possible to exceed the speed of decision (i.e., the constraints that time puts on data-driven decision making).

 

Is Decision Speed more important than Data Quality?

In my blog post Thaler’s Apples and Data Quality Oranges, I explained how time-inconsistent data quality preferences within business intelligence reflect the reality that with the speed at which things change these days, more near-real-time operational business decisions are required, which sometimes makes decision speed more important than data quality.

Even though advancements in computational power, network bandwidth, parallel processing frameworks (e.g., MapReduce), scalable and distributed models (e.g., cloud computing), and other techniques (e.g., in-memory computing) are making real-time data-driven decisions more technologically possible than ever before, as I explained in my blog post Satisficing Data Quality, data-driven decision making often has to contend with the practical trade-offs between correct answers and timely answers.

Although we can’t afford to completely sacrifice data quality for faster business decisions, and obviously high quality data is preferable to poor quality data, less than perfect data quality can not be used as an excuse to delay making a critical decision.

 

Is Decision Speed more important than Decision Quality?

The increasing demand for real-time data-driven decisions is not only requiring us to re-evaluate our data quality thresholds.  In my blog post The Circle of Quality, I explained the connection between data quality and decision quality, and how result quality trumps them both because an organization’s success is measured by the quality of the business results it produces.

Again, with the speed at which the business world now changes, the reality is that the fear of making a mistake can not be used as an excuse to delay making a critical decision, which sometimes makes decision speed more important than decision quality.

“Fail faster” has long been hailed as the mantra of business innovation.  It’s not because failure is a laudable business goal, but instead because the faster you can identify your mistakes, the faster you can correct your mistakes.  Of course this requires that you are actually willing to admit you made a mistake.

(As an aside, I often wonder what’s more difficult for an organization to admit: poor data quality or poor decision quality?)

Although good decisions are obviously preferable to bad decisions, we have to acknowledge the fragility of our knowledge and accept that mistake-driven learning is an essential element of efficient and effective data-driven decision making.

Although the speed of decision is not the same type of constant as the speed of light, in our constantly changing business world, the speed of decision represents the constant demand for good-enough data for fast-enough decisions.

 

Related Posts

The Big Data Collider

A Decision Needle in a Data Haystack

The Data-Decision Symphony

Thaler’s Apples and Data Quality Oranges

Satisficing Data Quality

Data Confabulation in Business Intelligence

The Data that Supported the Decision

Data Psychedelicatessen

OCDQ Radio - Big Data and Big Analytics

OCDQ Radio - Good-Enough Data for Fast-Enough Decisions

Data, Information, and Knowledge Management

Data In, Decision Out

The Real Data Value is Business Insight

Is your data complete and accurate, but useless to your business?

The Circle of Quality

Friday
Nov112011

You Say Potato and I Say Tater Tot

One thread of the comment discussion on my blog post The Metadata Continuum raised the excellent point that the demarcation of the border between data and metadata is important, but sometimes difficult to discern.  By extension, we can say the same thing about the demarcation of the border between data and information.

So, in this blog post, I thought I would try to offer an explanation about the importance of these demarcations using potatoes.

 

You Say Potato and I Say Potahto

Let’s Call the Whole Thing Off was a song written by George Gershwin and Ira Gershwin, which became famous for its playful lyrics that poked fun at the differences in the pronunciation of words, such as “you say potato and I say potahto.”

Spelling and pronunciation are included in the dictionary definition of a word, which is a good example of one of the many uses of metadata, namely as a label that provides a definition, description, and context for data.  Essentially, metadata describes data, and since data is attempting to describe a real world object, such as a potato, metadata is a further abstraction from reality.

And as we saw with the example of white horses in my blog post The Metadata Crisis, these abstract definitions can also include additional classifications (e.g., there are over 4,000 different varieties of potato), which also have to be well defined in order to facilitate clear communication and effective discussion.  These levels of abstractions, definitions, and classifications are essential to our attempts to understand, and do business with, the real world.  And this challenge continues even further with information.

 

You Say Potato and I Say Tater Tot

The difference, and relationship, between data and information is a common debate.  Not only do these two terms have varying definitions, but they are often used interchangeably.  Just a few examples include comparing and contrasting data quality with information quality, data management with information management, and data governance with information governance.

Some consider this an esoteric debate between data geeks and information nerds, but what is not debated is the importance of understanding how organizations use data and/or information to support their business activities.

Extending my analogy, data is like a potato and information is like a tater tot.  In other words, information is one of the many possible specific uses for data.  Information is one of the many possible specific things that we can make using data, which is why information quality professionals often speak about the information product.

So it’s important to remember that we can’t have a tater tot (information) without a potato (data), and that we can’t have either a tater tot or a potato without having a working definition (metadata) of what a potato is.

 

Let’s Not Call the Whole Thing Data

David Corrigan recently blogged about the importance of the metadata that tracks the lineage of information presented to an end user, and how the root causes of data quality and data governance issues are impossible to discover without this metadata.

Therefore, the lines of demarcation separating metadata, data, and information are not just an esoteric technical debate.  These demarcations are foundational to the efficiency and effectiveness of business operations.  So, let’s not call the whole thing data.

Let’s acknowledge the separate, but deeply interrelated, continuum formed by the disciplines of metadata, data, and information.

 

Related Posts

The Metadata Continuum

The Metadata Crisis

What’s the Meta with your Data?

Let’s Meta a Data

Listen to Peter Benson discuss Metadata, Data, and Information on the Knights of the Data Roundtable

Listen to Daragh O Brien discuss Data and Information Quality on OCDQ Radio

Listen to Gordon Hamilton discuss the Information Product on OCDQ Radio

Plato’s Data

Data, Information, and Knowledge Management

The Data-Information Continuum

The First Law of Data Quality

OCDQ Radio - The Fall Back Recap Show