The Acronymicon
Jim Harris in Books, Data Quality tagged Business-IT Collaboration, Communication, Humor, Master Data Management Sunday, May 30, 2010 at 5:30PM 
Image created under a Creative Commons Attribution License using: Wordle
“The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.” – Socrates
“The end of wisdom is the definition of acronyms.” – Jim Harris
The Acronymicon
The Necronomicon is a fictional grimoire (i.e., a textbook containing instructions on how to perform magic), which first appeared in the classic horror stories written by H. P. Lovecraft, and later appeared in other works, including some films, such as Army of Darkness, starring Bruce Campbell, which is one of my favorites—it’s a comedy and it’s highly recommended.
Therefore, the explanation for the rather unusual title of this blog post is that I could think of no better term to describe the fictional textbook containing instructions on how to discuss enterprise information initiatives by using acronyms, and only acronyms, other than:
The Acronymicon
Acronyms Gone Wild
For whatever reason, enterprise information initiatives (EIIs?) have a great fondness for TLAs (two or three letter acronyms): ERP (Enterprise Resource Planning), DW (Data Warehousing), BI (Business Intelligence), MDM (Master Data Management), DG (Data Governance), DQ (Data Quality), CDI (Customer Data Integration), CRM (Customer Relationship Management), PIM (Product Information Management), BPM (Business Process Management), and so many more—truly too many to list.
Additionally, we have apparently become so accustomed to TLAs, that we needed to take it to the next level with Acronyms 2.0 by starting the fun new trend of FLAs (four letter acronyms) such as software as a service (SaaS), platform as a service (PaaS), data as a service (DaaS), service oriented development of applications (SODA), and so many frakking more four letter acronyms.
I also have it on very good authority that by the end of this decade, the Semantic Web will deliver Acronyms 3.0 by creating an Ontology of Unambiguous Acronyms (OOUA), which will be written using a RDFS (Resource Description Framework Schema), in the FOAF (Friend of a Friend) vocabulary, which we will obviously query using SPARQL, which is itself a recursive acronym for SPARQL Protocol and RDF Query Language.
WTF?
Now, don’t get me wrong. I do appreciate how acronyms and other lexicons of terminology can be used as a convenient way of more efficiently discussing the complex concepts often underlying enterprise information initiatives.
However, too often acronyms are used without ever being defined, which can lead to conversations like that scene in the movie Good Morning, Vietnam where Adrian Cronauer (played by Robin Williams) responds to the overuse of military acronyms used by an officer in charge to describe an upcoming press conference by then former Vice President Richard Nixon with the question:
“Excuse me, sir. Seeing as how the VP is such a VIP, shouldn’t we keep the PC on the QT? Because if it leaks to the VC, he could end up MIA, and then we’d all be put out in KP.”
An even worse offense than not defining what the acronym stands for, is only providing what it stands for as the definition.
For example, when someone asks you the question “what is MDM?” and you respond by stating “Master Data Management,” that really doesn’t help all that much, does it?
Even when you use a better definition, such as the following one from the book Master Data Management by David Loshin:
“Master Data Management (MDM) incorporates business applications, information management methods, and data management tools to implement the policies, procedures, and infrastructures that support the capture, integration, and subsequent shared use of accurate, timely, consistent, and complete master data.”
This is only the beginning of a more detailed discussion, the specifics of which will vary based on your particular circumstances, including the unique corporate culture of your organization, which will greatly influence such things as how exactly the “policies, procedures, and infrastructures” are defined, and what “accurate, timely, consistent, and complete” actually mean.
For that matter, you shouldn’t even assume that everyone knows what you are referring to when you say “master data.”
My point is that you should always make sure that the key concepts of your enterprise information initiatives are clearly defined and in a language that everyone can understand. I am not just talking about translating the techno-mumbojumbo, because even business-speak can sound more like business-babbling—and not just to the technical folks.
Additionally, don’t be afraid to ask questions or admit when you don’t know the answers. Many costly mistakes can be made when people assume that others know (or pretend to know themselves) what acronyms and other terminology actually mean.
Instructions for using The Acronymicon
If you absolutely insist on using The Acronymicon to discuss enterprise information initiatives at your organization, please just remember that before you even open the book, you must first carefully recite the following words:
“Clatto Verata Nicto!”
No, wait—that’s not quite right. I think it’s something more like, you must first carefully recite the following words:
“Klaatu Barada Nikto!”
No, that doesn’t sound right either. Somebody should just create an acronym for it—they’re much easier to recite and remember.
Related Posts
Podcast: Business Technology and Human-Speak
Not So Strange Case of Dr. Technology and Mr. Business
The Game of Darts – An Allegory
Follow OCDQ
If you enjoyed this blog post, then please subscribe to OCDQ via my RSS feed, my E-mail updates, or Google Reader.
You can also follow OCDQ on Twitter, fan the Facebook page for OCDQ, and connect with me on LinkedIn.
Reader Comments (7)
OMG. This article made me LOL.
Shortcuts and popular culture seems to get in the way of doing the right thing.
Define the phrase before abusing it over and over again. We are all guilty of it, but there is still hope.
So to CYA, make sure you do it right.
Thanks Jim for a good smile on a long weekend.
Good post. Agree that acronyms sometimes are used too much without understandable definitions.
The funniest is the one using acronyms and who can not answer the question "what is XYZ short for?" :)
No arguments from me here, Jim. I was going to go with a comment like Garnie's but he beat me to it.
I'll start calling "fouls" at work when I hear some of these.
Frakking brilliant Jim! Reading this was a perfect way to start the week!
Our organization is presently organizing itself for Enterprise Content Management and at the initial meeting there must have been 10 or more acronyms bandied about.
I said: "Hey, why don't we define some of these terms using common language so we all make sure we are on the same page? And why don't we communicate them via our internal wiki so that others in the organization can start to get an idea of, and comment on, the meaning of some of these information management concepts?"
You can't get agreement, or buy-in, or move forward without that common understanding.
Thanks!
Jim, WELL STATED!
Your quote “the end of wisdom is the definition of acronyms” is so right on!
I've just been brought in to a company to demystify the acronyms and all the data elements that have no definition. Trust me I will not be using acronyms to define anything!
When one is new on the bench people don't look at me strange when I say "What does KBN represent?"
Someone wrote to me "brb" on an instant message. It took me longer to figure it out than it would have taken them to just write "be right back".
Thanks for the laughs!! LOL
Thanks everyone for your comments, your feedback (as always) is greatly appreciated!
@Garnie — CYA is definitely AOK when you do TLA (or FLA) the right way :-)
@Per — XYZ is short for Xenophobic Yodeling Zombies, right? :-)
@Phil — Cry Foul and Let Loose the Dogs of The Acronymicon!!! :-)
@Jill — A Wiki (definitely not another frakking FLA) is an excellent way to internally communicate the meaning of information management concepts using a common language. Mahalo :-)
@Judy — It took time for me to first learn and then get comfortable using the abbreviations that have become so common in instant messaging, texting, and now tweeting. As with any lexicon, this shorthand is fine as long as everyone knows what it means. Idk if I want 2 start another gr8 db8, so l8r lol :-)
Excellent, Jim! I couldn't agree more! As someone who regularly has to turn to sources like Wikipedia to find acronym definitions (and often then have to disambiguate which concept is being referred to), I appreciate this argument!
FWIW, I think Twitter is compounding the problem with the 140 character limit.
BTW, "OCDQ?" ;-)