The Borg of Analytics

Assimilation is Mandatory

One the powerful things about Unix is the philosophy of small tools used together to achieve a powerful outcome. Anyone who has used a directory listing and then piped that through grep to find a particular file will know how much easier it is to find a file then it is in a Microsoft operating (read large and complex) system.

It is that time of year that all my analytics (web and predictive) contracts have to be renewed. Having had several meetings with suppliers it has become obvious that they are all out to assimilate the world buy constantly buying up any company that does a useful and specific job in the field.
A good business practice is to use the best tools for the right job, I have found it it extremely rare that they all come from the one vendor.

It seems that rather than embrace this idea and work together; most companies want to totally own the space.

Why do I care? Well it is because it will make my comapny less revenue. Once you have signed up to this mega-system you have committed all your data to it. Your are locked in, the price of an alternative becomes too high to switch.

So what you will probably get is one useful component and the rest not working properly together and all being developed to the lowest common denominator.

So to all those companies out there ready to assimilate the entire analytics space I would suggest that collaboration rather than assimilation is the far forward for them and far more beneficial to their clients. They them specialise on what they do best rather than bringing them into the same bland corporate structure that required you to buy them in the first place.

Response to Beyond the Crisis: Debating the role of innovation

How can we explain the causes of the crisis: Financial system failure? Greed? Lack of productive locations for investment?

It’s a combination of factors. Firstly there was a large element of greed and people taking on far too much risk.   A symptom of the inflated expectations the markets have for the profitability of companies.  This causes them to have to “bet the farm” just to meet expectations.   

The other main factor is the inter-connectedness of the work economy which means that a failure in one part can bring down the whole system.  Combined with the incredible complicity of the world financial markets you find that few people really understand how it works, consequently the risk of debt instruments was not really understood by the traders buying them.

·  To what extent is the crisis a product of lack of innovation?

 

Ironically the problem may actually be down to innovation.  The Credit Default Swaps were an innovative product but one that was not clearly thought out. 

Innovation is one the buzz words that most angers me.  The dictionary definition of innovation is use of a new idea or method.  Just because something is new doesn’t mean it is a good idea. CDSs were a new idea and a very bad one as well. 

 

·  Where and how is value created today?

 

Value is created in solving customers’ real needs profitably.  A lot of what has been sold and what is now being left on the shelves were products that were not adding real value to peoples lives by solving their problems.  As such it was easy for consumers to stop purchasing these.

 

The other way value is created is through continuous improvement which has in manufacturing lead to impressive reliability.  We now need to apply the same approaches that have worked so well in manufacturing to the knowledge economy.

 

·  What role can government play in facilitating innovation and value creation (or getting out of the way)?

 

They must support education and lifelong learning by removing all tax on training courses and training materials.  I have paid for a post graduate course and am still tax on that and taxed on ebooks I buy because they are considered software.  Education should be encouraged and the governments policy of taxing education will reduce the number of people training in the skills the country needs for its future.

 

·  Does fundamental research need to be championed?

 

The introduction of the transistor lead to the IT industry which is a major driver of the world economy so if the research lucks out then it can bring huge benefits.  I would champion research but not at the expensive of more beneficial areas such as championing continuous improvement.

 

·  Where do ordinary people’s interests fit into debates about the future?

 

People should have the right to fulfil their needs which according to Maslow have 5 levels.  What we do in the future should be done with this in mind.  We should not bring in anything which will harm the ability of people to fulfil their needs.

 

·  Is the crisis a basis for taking on more ambitious challenges?

 

No it isn’t.  Lets sort out the basic challenges before we move onto ambitious.  Set SMART objectives and meet them rather than Big Hairy Goals that cannot be realised.

 

·  Are networked tools a key to dealing with the recession?

 

Not in the current form which although good for general networking and discussion are not sufficient for collaborative working which will be vital in creating new products that will thrive in the recessionary times.

 

·  What are the contemporary barriers to innovation?

 

There are too many to list but the most important factor would be the lack of risk taking and ability to take calculated risks.

 

·  Is there untapped potential in the design and creative industries

Only if they can combine their innate creativity with critical thinking.  We must learn to do both right and left brain thinking.  People may use too much left brain thinking but that is not done well.  Critical thinking skills need to be learnt to use the fully potential of the left brain.