Quantcast

MacGuffin, anyone?

In his years in BI, says QlikTech VP of product management Donald Farmer, “I’ve never seen a project fail for purely technical reasons. The organizational aspect was always the principal cause of failure.” Yet tools remain the industry’s obsession.

One Response to MacGuffin, anyone?

  1. This suggests that the BI solution technical architecture ALSO has to be compatible with the organisation’s culture, skill distribution, and workflows. It has to have low up-front risk, and quick time to benefits, as well as be justifiable on an ex-ante basis, i.e. immediate hard savings in time/money, since the long-term value/benefits of better decisions can never be know in advance. New products like Omniscope recognise that it is not just a technical problem and all of the above is equally important. Excel does not remain the BI tool of choice because it is technically superior, but its advantages re: all of the above have tended over the last 20 years to trump all the other BI architectures that are too risky/costly/demanding and skills-dependent.

    Changing this will require new BI solutions architectures that leverage 64-bit OS and very cheap RAM to create new solution architures that support agile BI and master data management, yet also have all the advantages of Excel in terms of giving business users control of their own destiny. We at Visokio think we have something to offer, and we will continue to work on delervering a better BI future for the typical business user.

The data industry thrives on conversation. Please submit a comment.