Does big data mean big problems?

The subject of Big Data is currently reaching the level of hype previously reserved for Social Media, Web2.0 and the dotcom boom & bust before it. Just like these previous concepts... big data is large enough, complex enough and technical enough to bewilder a lot of 'normal' people. And like its predecessors, it is sufficiently hard enough to describe... however I like the explanation:

"Big Data is anything that doesn't fit into an Excel spread sheet"

However it is obvious that some companies are making progress with big data... whilst others, especially the consultancies, are keen to make out they have been involved with big data since before it was big news.

Of interest to me was this video posting by McKinsey, which explains how to deliver big data and the necessary analytics tools into the hands of  managers who need it.
http://www.mckinsey.com/features/advanced_analytics

However I think the challenge with all of this talk about big data is not only of defining it , but also getting started in the subject. You can talk about big data all you like, but how do you actually start making progress with analysing it and when does it actually become database administration (which has been dealing with gigabytes of data since before the dotcom bubble).

the corporate layers - an idea developed

In a recent post I started to work through my thoughts around the development of McKinsey's company software layer concept. I mentioned that I thought there was at least one obvious omission (e.g. web services) and that a single layer to explain it all was too simple.

So now I find myself putting forward an evolved version of this idea, unashamedly taking McKinsey's model as the basis of it.

Corporate layers

View more PowerPoint from Hayden Sutherland

As you can see from my embedded presentation there are now five proposed layers rather than just two.

1. Core business processes
2. Web services & API’s
3. Owned media such as website(s), Apps, Kiosks, etc.
4. Paid media such as online advertising (PPC, etc.)
5. Earned media such as Social, Word-of-mouth, etc.

Although I believe the lines between owned, paid and earned are now becoming increasingly blurred, there is a place for each of the different communication media in my new model.

Companies and the services layers

I recently received a report from McKinsey [link] that covered the topic of the 'corporate software layer'. This wasn't just another publication talking about application development standards, it referred to a metaphorical layer of services that surrounds the core 'hardware' processes and functions of an organisation. This software layer is an all-encompassing wrapper that the author described as including APIs, digital customer touchpoints and even Social Media.

Coincidentally I was chatting with someone in the Digital industry only a few days ago (thanks Wyndham) about how the use of web-based services can allow a company to incrementally develop its inner and external functions to remain agile & responsive to changes. I explained that via a Service Orientated Approach (SOA), a company could continually evolve its client-facing functionality (internal and external clients), wrap legacy functions and get the most from its digital agencies... by getting them to utilise any existing services.
Note:
We also questioned why digital agencies never seemed to develop work for clients using their own suite of web services to quickly deliver more intelligent work for their clients, but that's another topic for this blog sometime).

Anyhow.... Having thought about this some more, I do think there's the opportunity to not only merge the two topics mentioned above, but to then represent this in a similar (but perhaps more complex) way than McKinsey have done.

Here's what I mean:

1. McKinsey (perhaps in an effort to de-techie their report) haven't mentioned SOA and it's obvious benefit.

2. The 'software layer' is a little too catch-all for me.

3. Their diagram doesn't explain the big difference between the more technical machine-to-machine interfaces and the softer services that involve human interaction.

I guess what I'm saying here is that there might not be just one layer around the business, but possibly several service layers..... And the diagram needs to reflect this.

Web2.0 is growing in 2008

I've had a report sitting in my office for several weeks now that I know I should have read . I even admit to feeling guilty each time I moved it to do something else. However, last Saturday I did eventually get around to reading McKinsey's Building the Web 2.0 Enterprise: McKinsey Global Survey Results when the wife was out last Saturday and X-factor had finished.

This second annual trend watch analyses the adoption of Web2.0 tools & technologies within businesses. The results of this survey found that whilst 21 percent of the respondents are satisfied with their use of these tools and are seeing changes throughout the enterprise as a consequence, 22 percent said they were dissatisfied. Some even claimed to have stopped using certain technologies altogether, although this appears mainly to be Peer-to-peer technologies, which I think may be as they are increasingly seen as either: a complex media product (e.g. BBC iPlayer) or part of the seedy world of illegal downloads & sharing (e.g. Bit Torrents).

However one of the reports findings, that may well be cause for optimism (especially for developers and vendors) , was that regardless of whether a company was satisfied in Web 2.0 tools & technologies or not, all plan to spend more on them in the future.