I like charismatic leaders of privately owned
companies—well, I do until they do something to the company
like Ken Olsen did to DEC. It's an interesting (but not very
proactive) aspect of governance—what most people do in
public (and there's a lot of regulated transparency and publicity
around a stock-market listing) which might make making a
catastrophically wrong decision a bit harder. Although, very
obviously, not impossible—we aren't talking black and white
here and some private companies get divorced from the real world
of the competition and some public companies worry more about the
market and the press than they do about their customers. And some
public companies are apparently run as fraudulent concerns;
Enron, for example, and the BCCI—the "Bank of Conmen and
Crooks International" according to someone in my bank at the
time; oddly enough, when BCCI was still being allowed to trade.
Institutionalised fraud is apparently difficult for auditors to
spot—the books add up but the company objectives are wrong
(I think there is still a place for ethics as part of good
governance). Effective governance, I think, comes with
transparency but transparency is necessary without being
sufficient. You also need attribution, enforcement and (dare I
say it) company ethics.
Something else that is necessary (still not sufficient) for good
governance is accurate information, as a basis for fact-based
decision making. Which is one reason why I follow BI generally
and why I was at an Information Builders
Inc. (IBI) customer day, listening to Gerry Cohen (its CEO
and founder) talking about strategy. I like Gerry anyway because
he's bright and experienced and as the CEO of a privately held
company he has the freedom to say what he thinks without worrying
too much about the press; and he is obviously very focused on his
customers, as well. I also like IBI's traditional focus on "BI
for the masses" which doesn't preclude "BI for Power Users" but
does promote transparency, I think, instead of simply focussing
on power-user information silos and the "knowledge is power"
attitude associated with them—which usually ensures that
knowledge isn't always available where it is needed.
Gerry has an interesting view of his competition. IBM, for
example, is a competitor; but IBM's very successful "DB2 Web
Query" for the iSeries, with 30k installations in 2 years, is
actually a re-badged version of IBI's WebFOCUS, he points out.
He also sees an increasing focus on low-latency "now" data, which
means that WebFOCUS is concentrating on providing out-of-the-box
access to high quality analytics by providing a GUI interface to
the R open source
stats libraries, much used in academic reaching institutions
and also in the open source "Business Intelligence and Reporting
Tools" (BIRT [http://eclipse.org/birt/phoenix/]) project. The
entire library comes
free with WebFOCUS, although only about 25% of it has the GUI
interface so far—and you have to pay for deployment.
Nevertheless, this library probably provides even more
functionality than SAS, Gerry claims, and there's a low barrier
to entry for familiarisation and training. Mention of SAS,
however, reminds me that a year or so ago IBI and SAS were best
of friends and WebFOCUS had direct access to SAS executables; I
wonder what's happened to that relationship? Gerry says that
2/3rds of the cost of doing analytics is in collecting data and
cleaning it up—which sounds about right to me—and
that IBI's business intelligence tools can already do more of
this than SAS does and run on more platforms (on IBM iSeries, for
example).
According to Gerry, IBI is now concentrating on security (it has
just delivered a new internal WebFOCUS
security model)—if you include external models, it has
lots of security models to chose from (Gerry says that this
choice makes it harder to hack, although it might also make it
harder for users to be sure they've implemented security
properly, it seems to me). Of course, this is an important aspect
of governance too—if you are to run a company with
"fact-based decisions" it is important that the integrity and
availability of those facts (and, only sometimes, their
confidentiality) is strongly protected. Information Builders is
apparently the only Business Intelligence company that's an
Organizational Member of OWASP, the "Open
Web Application Security Project", a worldwide free and open
community focused on improving the security of application
software generally. Gerry seems proud that with WebFOCUS Release
8, it's now operating at: "OWASP level 3, with a hardened
WebFOCUS shell and enlarged security model; and we've trained our
programmers in security awareness (such as in the necessity for
not giving away unnecessary information in error messages".
He also highlighted a special Release 7.7 of WebFOCUS for IBM z
series mainframes, which supports the System z Integrated
Information Processor (zIIP)
chip for "free" mips (free, because IBM charges by General
Processor, not by zIIP chip usage). With the latest z mainframes,
TCA (total cost of acquisition) is high, but the incremental cost
of adding new apps is low especially if you use zIIP; and,
according to Gerry, although zIIP was introduced in 2004, "we're
the only people using it in a large way", for a BI platform.
Effective utilisation of resources, such as any mainframe
investment, is an important aspect of governance.
Interestingly, given its existing emphasis on "mass BI" for
everyone, Gerry also told us that IBI was placing a new emphasis
on power users with something called "InfoAssist":
"this is really an end-user tool," Gerry says, "and we've always
been focussed on mass BI—but we need Info Assist when we
acquire Business Objects customers".
Leaving his own products, Gerry offered some general insights on
where information processing and governance is going. IBI has,
apparently, been playing with Amazon Electric Cloud and Gerry
advises, "don't ask cloud apps to read from behind your
firewall—put the data in the cloud"; which
presumably means that the cloud must be as well-governed as
internal systems (and the current popularity of "private
clouds").
He is also keen on electronic publishing for disseminating
information: "a huge money saver, often overlooked," he
says.
And he recommends real time Data Quality governance, because it's
"most cost effective to fix quality before it gets to the
database". This is partly because the infrastructure needed is
already there in the network and you don't have to build ETL
(extract, transform, load) stuff for a special data cleansing
exercise, you "just" cleanse the data as it passes on its way
in—if you have the technology to do this both efficiently
(fast) and effectively.
Gerry finished off with a quote from Lee Segall: "A man with one
watch knows what time it is; a man with two watches is never
quite sure"; which, he says, is the classic data quality
analogy. This is probably true—but Segall prefaced it with
"it is possible to own too much", which makes me think that it is
also possible for a badly governed company to "own" (in a rather
passive sense) too much poorly-understood data (regardless of any
data duplication problems) for it to be data rich and information
poor.
We are no longer accepting comments against this item. We suggest contacting the author directly.