How the smartest organizations are embedding analytics to transform information into insight and then action. Findings and recommendations from the first annual New Intelligent Enterprise Global Executive study.
To understand the challenges and opportunities associated with the use of business analytics, MIT Sloan Management Review, in collaboration with the IBM Institute for Business Value, conducted a survey of more than 3,000 business executives, managers and analysts from organizations located around the world. The survey was part of the 2010 New Intelligent Enterprise Global Executive Study and Research Project, which attempts to understand better how all organizations are trying to capitalize on information and apply analytics today and in the future.
One of the most significant findings is that there is a clear connection between performance and the competitive value of analytics. Survey respondents who agreed that the use of business information and analytics differentiated them were twice as likely to be top performers. Three stages, or capability levels, of analytics adoption emerged from the research: aspirational, experienced and transformed. The article provides a comprehensive description of each, enabling organizations to identify where they fall in the continuum. In addition, the authors include suggestions for the best entry points and techniques for each level, and measures to avoid the most common pitfalls.
Based on insights from the survey, case studies and interviews with experts, the authors also describe an emerging five-point methodology for successfully implementing analytics-driven management and rapidly creating value–as leading businesses are already managing to do. These include (1) focus on the biggest and highest data priorities, (2) within each of those priorities, start by asking questions, not by looking at the available data, (3) embed insights into business processes to make them more understandable and actionable, (4) keep existing capabilities and tools while adding new ones and (5) develop an overarching information agenda that enables decision making and strategy for the future.
4 Comments On: Big Data, Analytics and the Path From Insights to Value
Prof. Michael Porter wrote an article in the HBR and proposed a completely misleading idea that the firms have to execute the so-callled shared value strategy, which includes the economic value and social value, in order to be effective in conditions of new capitalism. However, in my opinion, the firms have to execute the gloval capital and labour sourcing strategies to continue to be competitive and increase
their profits in conditions of modern capitalism. This is a concrete example of wrong ideas and analytics by Prof. Michael Porter, Harvard University, which may lead to the escalation of the economic and finanacial crisis in the USA in 2011.
Viktor O. Ledenyov, Ukraine
Bravo!
The data resources owned by organizations in the information age combines with human resources to provide the fuel for business success.
Readers of this article will find some value in a few resources to help them wind their way through the ‘data maze”. This article provides a wonderful overview of the problems and opportunities. DAMA International http://www.dama.org is the professional association that supports for both Business and Technical data management professionals, creating a vendor neutral community that shares best practices and approaches. Enterprise Data World conferences http://edw2011.wilshireconferences.com/ are wonderful opportunities to connect, learn and grow.
I think analitycal tools is a booster for every decision we make. It equips us with definite reasons to make a better decision
Thanks for the report. I have some basic questions. May be I am missing something. The basic tenet seems to be how top performers were much better at analytics compared to the ones who are not. This is based on an extensive survey. But, the respondent who chooses whether the company is a top performer also rates them on various criteria on analytics. Will that really give good results? There might be corelation – won’t a person who thinks their company “substantially outperforms their peers” (criteria for top performer) have a tendency to rank his company highly as well in their analytic capability? If there is a bias towards the company you work for, won’t that reflect in all questions? Has something been done to remove those biases?
Am not an expert on statistics, but I can see that there would be some correlation, but am not sure if I see any causation. Alternate point are welcome.