<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>datadoodle &#187; Twitter</title>
	<atom:link href="http://datadoodle.com/tag/twitter/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://datadoodle.com</link>
	<description>Where the humans meet analytics and related subjects</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Jan 2012 00:03:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<item>
		<title>The Dow of BI</title>
		<link>http://datadoodle.com/2011/06/23/the-dow-of-bi/</link>
		<comments>http://datadoodle.com/2011/06/23/the-dow-of-bi/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 20:37:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ted Cuzzillo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[BI industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[definitions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[indicators]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analytics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[marketing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tableau]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://datadoodle.com/?p=1796</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How do we take the pulse of the BI/analytics industry? What if those who promote the technology, advise the clients, and build the systems actually measured their collective progress with a number? It would be an ongoing, forever-updating, simple benchmark. It would be the industry's Dow Jones Industrial Average.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>
I don&#8217;t mind long lines at trade show buffets. All else being equal, the length roughly equals attendance, which roughly indicates industry fizz. For an indicator, though, the analytics/business intelligence industry can do better than that.
</p>
<p>
How do we take the pulse? What if those who promote the technology, advise the clients, and build the systems actually measured their collective progress with a number? It would be an ongoing, forever-updating, simple benchmark. It would be the industry&#8217;s Dow Jones Industrial Average.
</p>
<p>
Four or five years ago, when the industry seemed simpler, I envisioned a number like this. Why not?
</p>
<p>
First hurdle: the lack of complete public data. We have it for a few vendors, such as IBM and Oracle, but not for the industry&#8217;s many startups. For example, how does Tableau&#8217;s ascent figure in, and how do we measure it?
</p>
<p>
Could we count the number of BI-related hash tags in Twitter? Maybe, but what does the number indicate? Is it success or marketing people out of work? Tweets from Tableau, for example, have been way down for six months or more. Here, down means up. They must have something cooking.
</p>
<p>
Slightly more credible than buffet lines are the annual surveys by industry analysts. Business intelligence as a priority is up &mdash; or was it down? &mdash; this year from last, they say. But what did survey respondents mean by &#8220;business intelligence&#8221;?
</p>
<p>
Traditional deciders say &#8220;BI&#8221; to signify plumbing &mdash; metaphorically, the path from groundwater to kitchen sink. Did you ever see a plumber&#8217;s dream house? He&#8217;s installed no drywall; he wants the pipes exposed to admire the workmanship and efficiency: No leaks, good flow.  Cooking, bathing, and washing the cat all come later if there&#8217;s time.
</p>
<p>
The non-plumbers make use of the water. The &#8220;kitchen sink&#8221; is where all that nice, clean data pays off. So the ideal point of measurement would be where data-based evidence reaches decision makers&#8217; minds &mdash; say, just before it commingles with the tarot cards.
</p>
<p>
At that point, how strong is the influence of data analysis? How good is the analysis? How good and complete is the data?
</p>
<p>
If we could find a proxy for that pulse, we just might have found the Dow of BI.
</p>
<p>
I&#8217;ll ask around among industry mavens, especially the the cooks.</p>
<img src="http://datadoodle.com/wordpress/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=1796&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://datadoodle.com/2011/06/23/the-dow-of-bi/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Lyza stole the show at TDWI Las Vegas</title>
		<link>http://datadoodle.com/2010/03/11/how-lyza-stole-the-show-at-tdwi-las-vegas/</link>
		<comments>http://datadoodle.com/2010/03/11/how-lyza-stole-the-show-at-tdwi-las-vegas/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 08:10:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Ted Cuzzillo</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[creative analysis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[events]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[analysts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[collaboration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[conversation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dave Wells]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[future]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[las vegas]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Lyza]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mark Madsen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Scott Davis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tdwi]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tools]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Twitter]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://datadoodle.com/?p=1193</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Lyzasoft wasn&#8217;t among the 38 exhibitors in TDWI&#8217;s Las Vegas exhibit hall. Lyzasoft sponsored no part of the lunch, and they hired no stage magician. But their buzz was the loudest I heard over the event&#8217;s five days. Others may have heard different buzz because buzz varies. Business intelligence elites gather every year at TDWI&#8217;s [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p></p><p>
Lyzasoft wasn&#8217;t among the 38 exhibitors in TDWI&#8217;s Las Vegas exhibit hall. Lyzasoft sponsored no part of the lunch, and they hired no stage magician. But their buzz was the loudest I heard over the event&#8217;s five days.
</p>
<p>
Others may have heard different buzz because buzz varies. Business intelligence elites gather every year at TDWI&#8217;s big Las Vegas event to teach, and they end up schmoozing, too. Over beer, food, and sometimes playing cards, they compare notes.
</p>
<p>
Is anyone seeking a consensus? I suppose someone might, but the interesting ones just play with ideas, reflect on what others say, make a joke, and think about it. If there&#8217;s any &#8220;truth,&#8221; it develops during a lot of talk and thought, whether it&#8217;s about politics, tofu, the future of passenger rail in America, or business. That goes for any kind of conversation, whether the medium is words or data.
</p>
<p>
In business, the conversation is somehow forgotten in favor of the data. But to Scott Davis, CEO of Lyzasoft, the conversation is critical to understanding the data. &#8220;A chart has no context at all,&#8221; he said in mid February. &#8220;The conversation is what&#8217;s really valuable.&#8221;
</p>
<p>
The conversation-free, top-down &#8220;single version of the truth&#8221; isn&#8217;t always useful for those who need to manage data for specific uses and contexts. Its &#8220;truth&#8221; may in fact be no better than Soviet planners&#8217; forecasts of market demand for women&#8217;s lingerie. &#8220;A single version of the truth,&#8221; said Third Nature research director Mark Madsen in Las Vegas, &#8220;is true for a single beat of the corporate heart.&#8221;
</p>
<p>
Enter Lyza 2, Lyzasoft&#8217;s new version of its data-wrangling and collaboration tool made for data analysts determined to create truth for specific uses and context. The first edition of Lyza offered Excel-like personalization. In the new edition, collaboration seems to have been the guide.
</p>
<p>
You could see this year&#8217;s improvements coming in last year&#8217;s email from <a href="http://www.lyzasoft.com/">Lyzasoft</a> CEO Scott Davis: &#8220;Even though they are quants, their world is personal,&#8221; he wrote. &#8220;Relationships are vital. They think in terms of &#8216;who do I know who knows X type of information sources?&#8217;&#8221; He could have also been talking about journalists, artists, and anyone else who has to hear signals within noise.
</p>
<p>
In the new edition, Lyza encourages fluid interactions with a variety of social-media tools: email, Twitter-like messaging, SMS messaging, bookmark collections with annotations, and other tools track and fortify discussion. Lyza lets people work easily with other smart people they trust. If &#8220;Steve&#8221; believes that &#8220;Brian&#8217;s&#8221; work is good and &#8220;George&#8217;s&#8221; work is not, he can work with only Brian&#8217;s data. It also publishes to the new tool, Lyza Commons, for even greater collaboration while retaining users&#8217; ability to interact with data. Lyza 2 loves a good conversation.
</p>
<p>
The data and everything that happens to it gets tracked automatically. Unlike in Excel worksheets, changes are transparent. Automatic documenting allows any change to be dug up and fixed. If only the data-free conversations in politics and other parts of business had such a tool.
</p>
<p>
I was surprised to hear spontaneous praise for Lyza&#8217;s new version. <a href="http://ecm.elearningcurve.com/">eLearningCurve</a> education director Dave Wells and <a href="http://thirdnature.net/">Third Nature</a> principal and one of the event&#8217;s keynote speakers Mark Madsen both did. I heard the same from several other BI experts, too. Madsen even gave a brief look at Lyza in his Executive Summit presentation on the future of BI.
</p>
<p>
I harmonize with people who appreciate Lyza at least partly because I think it&#8217;s smart to let people work the way they want to work &mdash; the way people have always worked. They prefer working with people they trust and with tools that respond. Everything else is static.</p>
<img src="http://datadoodle.com/wordpress/?ak_action=api_record_view&id=1193&type=feed" alt="" />]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://datadoodle.com/2010/03/11/how-lyza-stole-the-show-at-tdwi-las-vegas/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

