Care of Feedburner I have just created a page where you can grab the animated widget above and easily add it to your site or blog. The widget cycles through the headlines of my five most recent articles. A link to this also appears in the RSS box at the top of the right hand side bar.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
“Businesses Are Still Crazy for BI After All These Years” – CIO.com
27 February 2009Thomas Wailgum has written an article at CIO.com in which he talks about continuing demand for BI, but adds that this, in turn, suggests that in many organisations BI has yet to deliver on its promise. As Thomas puts it:
“I see pent-up enterprise-wide frustration, aimed squarely at IT and CIOs for failing to give the business what it needs and deserves”
He sees the fundamental problem as being fragmented systems and stand-alone BI applications. This sounds like challenges that I have faced before. I agree that BI only realises it potential when a more strategic and wide-ranging approach is taken. Something I refer to in many places on this blog, but possibly most directly in Holistic vs Incremental approaches to BI.
My basic point is that while it is sensible to take a pragmatic, incremental approach to implementing BI (collecting successes as you go and building momentum), this needs to be within the framework of a more encompassing vision for what the eventual BI system will be like and do.
I don’t believe that you can do BI by halves and remain somewhat sceptical about the claims of some of the newer BI products to do away with the necessary hard work.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
Recommended Business Intelligence sites
27 February 2009I have had a short list of recommended Business Intelligence sites on my sidebar for a while. I have just added a page where you can provide me with details of a site that you would like me to add. I’ll review any submissions and decide whether or not to post a link, so please don’t expect an automated service. Also, I’m just as interested in small sites that are just starting out as in established ones with a large subscriber base; what counts is whether your ideas are interesting.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
Measuring the benefits of Business Intelligence
26 February 2009This post is based on some comments that I made on an article by Dorothy Miller at IT Business Edge. The title of Dorothy’s piece is Measuring the Return on Investment for Business Intelligence.
Introduction

In a nutshell, good BI is all about users taking better business decisions. There are other benefits, some of which I allude to in this article, but nothing outweighs the potentially massive impact of taking better decisions.
While you would think that this is a very positive scenario for BI projects, there is a fly in the ointment. BI doesn’t let users take better business decisions, only good BI does that. Which begs the question: how do you tell how good you BI is and whether it is providing the promised benefits? This difficult area is the subject of this short article.
Measuring BI payback directly
All of the various different ways of measuring return on investment, from the simplest to the most sophisticated, compare the amount of money you spend to the amount of money you gain. Establishing the first parameter for this equation should be relatively simple, determining the second one is anything but straightforward.
In its purest form, the observation that taking better decisions should result in increased profits is entirely sound. If a BI project is targeting areas at the core of a company’s business (and why would you be investing in BI if this is not the case) then there should be a positive impact on profitability. This might be through increased sales or other income (assuming that these are at a profitable price), through increased margins on sales, reduced expenses, or a combination of all three. Of course the ways that good BI can contribute to each of these areas are manifold, but each will come down essentially to one of these three things.
The problem is that many other externalities can impact each of these areas. Some industries are cyclical, the impact of competitors will vary over time, demand for products will be different at different times, the business mix will not stay constant, markets can appear and disappear very quickly sometimes. Also, often the impact of better business decisions will not be realised until some future date; this year’s decisions may impact next year’s profits, or a strategic investment decision may not bear fruit for many years. While good BI will help you to make sense of these trends, at the same time it is difficult to disentangle the impact of BI on results from them.
However, sometimes it is possible to discern the direct impact of BI and I will offer a few examples:
1. Improvements in what BI is measuring
Suppose an element of your BI system tracks the number of sales leads that an organisation has against the number of orders placed. Being able to slice and dice such numbers by territory, product, marketing campaign, channel, customer segment, customer and so on is valuable in managing the sales process. However the trending capabilities of BI will also allow you to compare before and after. If the BI tool is truly being effective, then it should be possible to show that proportion of orders to leads is greater after its implementation than before it. In fact there should be a steady upward curve post-implementation as the system beds in and also as users find more creative ways to employ the information it gathers. If this is not the case, then something is wrong.
2. What if analyses
Supposing that the BI system aims to better manage the portfolio of a business; i.e. the balance of products and/or services that it sells. Again the historical aspect of BI can help us to consider its impact. Consider the simplified example of an organisation that has just three products: A, B and C, with each making up a third of sales. A good BI system will be able to calculate profitability for each product. Inevitably, shifts in market conditions will cause these profitabilities to change over time. Our example company might react to an increase in the profitability of product A in such a way that its portfolio becomes A (50%), B (25%), C (25%) – the assumption here is that the information available in their BI system is the main catalyst for change. What is important again is that the BI system holds historical information. This should allow a what if calculation to be performed; in this case, what if the mix of products had been left at 33%/33%/33%? The difference between calculated profitability under this scenario and actual profitability is one measure of the impact of good BI.
[It is interesting to note that this approach can also be used to support the case for BI projects. One technique that I have successfully employed is to look at an organisation's results over a five-year period, use the first three years to develop a simple hypothesis for decision making (e.g. we should sell a product if it meets a set of criteria and not otherwise) and then use the last two to validate this. This type of study says something like: if we had had better information in the past, we would have taken different decisions with the following - hopefully positive - results. To make this a little clearer, the study I carried out showed that greater availability of even very basic BI would have led to profit margins doubling. I will cover this approach in more detail in a forthcoming article.]
3. Measurable productivity increases
Aside from enabling better decisions to be taken, good BI can save people time and effort, thereby increasing productivity. It is possible to measure such things. By both general survey and a specific analysis of tasks carried out, I was able to demonstrate that pre-BI implementation it could take 5-7 days to assemble all the information needed for a key account review. Post-BI implementation, this became a matter of minutes. Care should be taken in scaling-up these figures to overall time saved, but such studies can give a good indication of increased productivity and, if accompanied by some conservative cost estimates, can be presented in terms of actual monetary impact.
4. Direct comparison of profitability
In some companies and markets it may be possible to directly measure changes in profitability relating to the use of BI. Alternatively, it may be possible to adjust results to remove the impact of some external issues (e.g. where there is publicly available information about overall trends in the market). Sometimes the relationship between the implementation of good BI and corporate results will be so striking, that there will be no argument about their correlation. This is a situation that I have experienced myself.
Measuring BI payback via proxies
Notwithstanding the above points, the most likely scenario is that it will be challenging to discern the precise impact of a BI project. Given this, instead of giving up, it is important to consider any available proxies. Some of these are discussed in this section, all rest upon the assumption that business people are rational and will only use systems that add value, making their work easier or improving decision-making.
Many of these proxies are self-evident, so I won’t offer too much commentary on them.
5. User adoption
How many people use the system and do more people want to use it? How do these numbers change over time? What is penetration like in different areas of the organisation?
6. Actual usage
Of course this relates to the previous point as well, but directly measuring usage and even using your BI tool to analyse how this changes over time is important. If there is a correlation between how much a part of the organisation uses the system and how good its results are, so much the better.
7. User retention
Of the people who are given access to the system and trained in its use, how many go on to become regular users? How does this change over time?
8. Demand for enhancements / extension to the system
If you have people wanting the system to do more, then they must be happy with how it is working in general terms.
9. Feedback from surveys
It always helps to get feedback on what you are doing. Excerpts from one such survey appear here.
10. Do business users mention the system in meetings?
When presenting figures to senior management, is the source quoted as a matter of course (hopefully to establish that the figures are reliable)?
Summary
This article has argued that establishing the benefits of BI can be difficult, but that it is by no means impossible. There are a range of techniques available to either directly or indirectly assess its impact. Of course there are probably other creative ways to do this that other organisations are employing and which I have not mentioned.
Business Intelligence practitioners should pay especial attention to this area, it is an opportunity to demonstrate that the yields from BI projects can be substantial. In fact, it is my opinion that in many industries no other type of IT project will have greater payback than BI. It should be a priority for those who tout the benefits of BI to show that there is real substance behind these claims. My experience suggests that it is definitely worth taking the time and effort to prove this convincingly.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
“All that glisters is not gold” – some thoughts on dashboards
25 February 2009Yesterday I was tweeting quotes from Poe and blogging lines attributed to Heraclitus. Today I’m moving on to Shakespeare. Kudos to anyone posting a comment pointing out the second quote that appears later in the text.
Introduction
Dashboards are all the rage at present. The basic idea is that they provide a way to quickly see what is happening, without getting lost in a sea of numbers. There are lots of different technologies out there that can help with dashboards. These range from parts of the product suites of all the main BI vendors, through boutique products dedicated to the area, all the way to simply using Java to write your own.
A lot of effort needs to go into how a dashboard is presented. The information really does need to leap off the screen, it is important that it looks professional. People are used to seeing well-designed sites on the web and if your corporate dashboard looks like it is only one step removed from Excel charts, you may have a problem. While engaging a design firm to help craft a dashboard might be overkill, it helps to get some graphic design input. I have been lucky enough over the years to have had people on my teams with experience in this area. They have mostly been hobbyists, but they had enough flair and enough of an aesthetic taste to make a difference.
However, echoing my comments on BI tools in general, I think an attractive looking dashboard is really only the icing on the cake. The cake itself has two main other ingredients:
- The actual figures that it presents (and how well they have been chosen) and
- The Information Architecture that underpins them
I’ll now consider the importance of these two areas.
Choosing the KPIs

The acronym KPI is bandied about with enormous vigour in the BI community. Sometimes what the ‘K’ stands for can get a bit lost in the cacophony. Stepping back from dashboards for a few minutes, I want to focus on the measures that you have in your general business intelligence applications such as analysis cubes. Things like: sales revenue, units sold, growth, head count, profit and so on.
[Note: If you don't like BI buzzwords, please feel free to read "figures", or "numbers" where ever you see "measures". I may attempt to provide my own definitions of some of these terms in the future as the Wikipedia entries aren't always that illuminating.]
When you have built a Data Mart for a particular subject area and are looking to develop one or more cubes based on this, you may well have a myriad of measures to select from. In some of the earliest prototype cubes that my teams built, we made the mistake of having too many measures. The same observation equally applied to the number of dimensions (things that you want to slice and dice the measures by, e.g. geography, line of business, product, customer etc.). Having too many measures and dimensions led to a cube that was cumbersome, difficult to navigate and where the business purpose was less that crystal clear. These are all cardinal sins, but the last is the worst as I have referred to elsewhere. The clear objective is to cut down on both the figures and the business attributes that you want to look at them by. We set a rule (which we did break a couple of times for specialist applications) of generally having no more than ten measures and ten dimensions in a cube and ideally having less.
Well this all sounds great, the problem – and the reason for this diversion away from dashboards – is which measures do you keep and which do you drop. Here there is no real alternative to lots of discussions with business partners, building multiple prototypes to test out different combinations and, ultimately, accepting that you might make some mis-steps in your first release and need to revisit the area after it has been “shaken down” by real business use. I won’t delve into this particular process any deeper now. Suffice it to say that choosing which measures to include in a cube it is both an area that is important to get right and one in which it is all to easy to make mistakes.
So, retuning to our main discussion, if picking measures at the level of an analysis cube is hard, just how hard is it to pick KPIs for a dashboard. I recall a conversation with the CEO of a large organisation in which he basically told me to just pick the six most important figure and put them on a dashboard (with the clear implication that sooner would be rather better than later). After I had explained that the view of the CEO in this area was of paramount importance and that his input on which figures to use would be very valuable, we began to talk about what should be in and what should be out. After a period of going round in circles, I at least managed to convey the fact that this was not a trivial decision.
What you want with the KPIs on a dashboard is that they are genuinely key and that you can actually tell something from graphing them. The exercise in determining which figures to use and how to present them was a lengthy one, but very worthwhile. You need to rigorously apply the “so what?” test – what action will people take based on the trends and indicators that are presented to them. In the end we went for simplicity, with a focus on growth.
There was a map showing how each country was doing against plan; colour-coded red, amber and green according to their results. There were graphs comparing revenue to budget by month and the cumulative position and there was a break-down by business unit. The only to elements of interaction were to filter for a region or country and a business unit or line of business. Any further analysis required pulling up an underlying cube (actually we integrated the cube with the dashboard so that context was maintained moving from one to the other – this was not so easy as the dashboard and cube tools, while from the same vendor, were on two different major release numbers).
There were many iterations of the dashboard, but the one we eventually went live with received general acclaim. I’m not sure what we could have done differently to shorten the process.
Where does the data come from?
The same range of dashboard tools that I mention in the introduction are of course mostly capable of sourcing their data from pretty much anywhere. If the goal is to build a dashboard, then maybe it is tempting to do this as quickly as possible, based on whatever data sources are to hand (as in the diagram above). This is probably the quickest way to produce a dashboard, but it is unlikely to produce something that is used much, tells people anything useful, or adds any value. Why do I say this?
Well the problem with this approach is that all you are doing is reflecting what is likely to be a somewhat fragmented (and maybe even chaotic) set of information tools. Out of your sources, is there a unique place to go to get a definitive value for measure A? Do the various different sources hold data in the same way and calculate values using the same formulae? Do sources overlap (either duplicating data, or function), if so, which ones do you use? Do different sources get refreshed with the same frequency and do they treat currency the same way? Are customers and products defined consistently everywhere?
Leaving issues like these unresolved is a sure way to perpetuate a poor state of information. They are best addressed by establishing a wider information architecture (a simplified diagram of which appears above). I am not going to go into all of the benefits of such an approach, if readers would like more information, then please browse through the rest of this blog and the links to other resources that it contains (maybe this post would be a good place to start). What I will state is that a dashboard will only add value if it is part of an overall consistent approach to information, something that best practice indicates requires an Information Architecture. Anything else is simply going to be a pretty picture, signifying nothing.
Summary
So my advice to those seeking to build their first dashboard has three parts. First of all, keep it simple and identify a small group of measures and dimensions, which are highly pertinent to the core of the business and susceptible to graphical presentation. Second, dashboards are not a short-cut to management information Nirvana, they only really work when they are the final layer in a proper approach to information that spans all areas of the organisation. Finally, and partly driven by the first two observations, if you are in charge of building a dashboard, make sure that the plans you draw up reflect the complexity of the task and that you manage expectations accordingly.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
The confluence of BI and change management
24 February 2009The tag-line of this blog brings together business intelligence and cultural transformation. While one driver for this is that I have led BI projects that had explicit goals of cultural transformation, I think that there is a deeper connection to be explored here.
In other articles (notably “Can You Really Manage What You Measure?” by Neil Raden and Actionable Information), I discuss my experience that BI only adds value if:
- The information it provides answers pertinent business questions, and
- The answers to these questions lead to people taking action.
This means that any successful BI implementation has to consider such messy and difficult things as changing how people behave. This is where the link with change management arises.
Now of course you can argue that change management is an indispensible discipline for any business project (my strong opinion is that any IT project is a type of business project) and this is clearly true. However the parameters within which a new transaction processing system has to operate are different. Here if a person does not use the system, then work does not get done. Either it is impossible to carry out your job without the system (maybe only the system generates the necessary documentation), or not using the system to record transactions is a breech in compliance (keeping paper copies in your drawer).
BI systems are not like this. People chose to use them because they judge that they either make their business life easier, or they help to improve their decision-making (hopefully both). If someone doesn’t want to use a BI system, then they won’t and can probably get on with other parts of their job. The reason that change management is even more important in BI projects is that the element of compliance (or even coercion) is absent. If you want people to use the system and behave differently as a result, then you need to think about how best to influence them in these directions.
I have written elsewhere about the importance of marketing, education and follow-up in these areas. It also is important to explicitly recognise that a BI practitioner needs to be fully engaged in change management if they are to be successful.
A final thought also worth considering is that, as the BI industry matures and focus turns more to making it work in a business context than the latest flashy dashboard technology, it is likely that one of the things that will differentiate the best users of BI is how well they manage the necessary and desirable change that it drives.
πυρὸς θάνατος ἀέρι γένεσις, καὶ ἀέρος θάνατος ὕδατι γένεσις
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
Google mail problems
24 February 2009Along with millions of others today I suffered from the outage in Google‘s web-based e-mail service, Gmail (or googlemail). After the initial frustration, I began to think about how much we all rely on these “free” (aka advertising-supported) web-services and how much we feel bereft when they are not around. It is the equivalent of having an electricity black-out.
A number of other points occur:
- What happened to Google’s famed redundancy and massive server farms?
- Why did the outage last so long?
- Why were more informative error messages not posted, as opposed to the (rather hopeful) suggestion that you might care to try again in 30 seconds?
- Should I really have kept track of my HotMail account details?
- Was Outlook really that bad? [OK I might be getting carried away with this last one]
Mail outages happen. Perhaps they happen more in corporate environments if you allow for the number of mail users that Google supports. Last year I suffered a three day mail outage in a corporate environment, rather ironically relying on Gmail at the time. Maybe of greater concern to Google is the potential impact of problems like this on their move to provide corporate mail via their Gmail platform. I’m sure that their availability meets or exceeds that of most in-house mails systems, but problems like today’s create the wrong impression. This is particularly the case when they follow hard on the heels of their search problem of a few weeks back, when every page of every site was tagged as potentially harmful to your computer (true as this point might be philosophically).
In some ways it might even be comforting to some IT professionals to see that the best and biggest can be plagued by problems. But before we luxuriate in schadenfreude too much, it is worth reflecting that when any element of IT goes wrong, consumers of it tend to see this as an attribute of IT as a whole – after all it’s just yet another IT problem isn’t it?
This post was one that Computing used to compile their Editor’s Diary article about the gmail outage and also is featured in Editor Bryan Glick‘s further article explaining his innovative use of twitter to source the material.
There are also some discussions related to this area on the LinkedIn.com CIO Magazine Forum (as ever you need to be a member of LinkedIn.com and the group to read these).
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
Bookmarks
18 February 2009The more observant of readers may have noticed that new bookmarking buttons now appear both on the right-hand sidebar and at the foot of all articles. These allow you to file the contents of this blog on your favourite site (at present, Technorati, del.icio.us, digg, Reddit and NewsVine are supported). See also Wikipedia’s article on the subject.
The buttons to the right will create a bookmark for the entire site. Those appearing at the end of an article will bookmark just that article. As ever if you experience any problems with these links, please tell me about them on the Report Problems page.
Hopefully this minor tweak will make the site more convenient for visitors.
Note:
Since reading Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid by Douglas R. Hofstadter as a child, I have been interested in self-reference and feedback loops. Here I am generating my own example.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
BI vendors need inspiration – Andreas Bitterer at Gartner
18 February 2009I rather belatedly picked up on an article by Andreas Bitterer posted on the Gartner blogs network. The title of this piece is Same Old Business Intelligence.
Andreas talks about the growing maturity of the BI market and identifies phases such as integration and innovation that now seem to be largely past. With all of the recent consolidation of the BI vendor market, it is difficult to see any major new plays in this arena. Also many BI tools now have functionality and scalability to spare. Andreas calls for vendors to have greater inspiration in order to unlock the latent potential of BI.
I agree that BI is now a very mature market. Of course there may be some disruptive technology about to be released which will change this perspective, but until this emerges, the description is accurate. While this may make 2009 onwards as less exciting time for people selling BI tools and platforms, the maturity of a technology tends to be correlated with the potential for it to add value in a business context. I hope that BI has now arrived at this tipping point and that the current economic climate may even be seen to have been positive for BI in retrospect.
What I feel is missing is not technology, but a more grown-up approach to leveraging BI in organisations. If BI is to come of age then there it needs to become more of a strategic enabler than a point solution. Each department having its own BI seems to be an obstacle. As I have argued elsewhere, it is only when a holistic approach is taken to BI that organisations begin to reap the real benefits. In the same article I also explain my view that an incremental approach to implementation is complimentary to this vision, but the vision needs to come first.
Having succeeded in making the use BI part of an organisation’s DNA, I hope that this approach will start to become the norm and that BI will move to the strategic centre business; the place from which its true potential can be realised.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|
A list of potential DW/BI pitfalls – by someone who has clearly been there
17 February 2009Browsing through my WordPress Tag Surfer today (a really nice feature by the way), I came across an interesting list of problems that can occur in a data warehousing / business intelligence project, together with suggestions for managing these. A link appears below:
Eight Reasons why Data Warehouse and, subsequently, Business Intelligence efforts fail
The author, Raphael Klebanov, has clearly lived the data warehousing process and a lot of what he says chimes closely with my own experience.
Some of his themes around business engagement, the alignment of BI delivery with business needs and the importance of education are echoed throughout my own writing. This article is definitely worth a read in my opinion.
Yes I know the illustraion ages me.
| Tweet this article on twitter.com | |
| Bookmark this article with: | |||||
Technorati |
| del.icio.us |
| digg |
| Reddit |
| NewsVine |
|

Technorati
del.icio.us
digg
Reddit
NewsVine
Posted by Peter Thomas 















Facebook
del.icio.us
digg
Reddit
Stumble