Business Intelligence, Done Right

Business Intelligence efforts often fail, not because of the technicians, but because of the disjointed relationships we (IT) have with the business. We fear relationships. We think that our investments and communications are a waste of time because we have a tremendous amount of downward pressure to deliver – so we start quickly and build […]

Business Intelligence efforts often fail, not because of the technicians, but because of the disjointed relationships we (IT) have with the business. We fear relationships. We think that our investments and communications are a waste of time because we have a tremendous amount of downward pressure to deliver – so we start quickly and build according to some document that we substitute as face time with our partner. To fix this problem, we need to take the best part of our building experience as ITers and put that together with the best part of relationship management – skills that we often don’t posses, but are vital to successfully delivering value and meeting our partners expectations.
{more on “The Right Way” below}

Kimbal’s methodology calls for the segregation of the three layers of BI and this is fantastic. There are in fact three separate BI tracks that can and should run concurrently. The three tracks are:

1.    Technical Architecture

2.    Data Architecture

3.    Application Architecture

After all, we need to make progress on the technical choices of architecture and tools. What is our environment like, what standard tools do we use, what is our technical strategy to frame and contain our BI effort?

At the same time, we need to start looking at our data. What data will we need to work with, what is it, how should it relate, where does it come from, how do we extract, transform and load it. These are considerations of the data architecture effort.
Again, at the same time, what level of innovation do we need to arrive at? How do we present this to the user and provide the desired interaction to help mine data to craft information.

Kimbal’s Methodology

This methodology is right on! It is triggered by and the scope is managed by the requirements. These requirements are derived from that box that is labeled “Program/Project Planning”.  But it’s not enough, it’s not there yet! In my mind, this is a bit limited and really only addresses the “Go” portion of the project – to build. All too often, BI projects fail because of things that are ‘above’ or before the Go. Here is what I have found to be the differentiating factors.

Requirements should be built from Strategy. Why are we building this BI application? What are the important questions that need to be answered? What is the value that these answers bring; are we making things better or faster or cheaper? A well formulated strategy addresses these questions and should manage the deliverables. When we rely on a set of requirements to build a BI solution, we are abstracted from the strategy and this is not good. When this abstraction occurs, we are removed from the business value and are relegated as a commodity…simply build to this specification.

However, strategy is not born without a birthing process. The birthing process consists of a couple of elements. The first is an alignment or a focus at most senior level. If we can’t align on the true aspects of the business, we are forced to work in a vacuum and can, at best produce a solution that is severely slanted. This slant often caters to the loudest voice or the biggest ego. Worse, our solution is then forever raised in a silo that contributes to expensive growth and maturity with a limited enterprise appeal. If and only if we get this alignment, we are doomed to deliver value slices rather than holistic value.
This alignment is not enough. After we have a focus, we then have to dive deep within the organization to see what raw materials we have to work with. I refer to this phase as ‘Discovery’. Once we are aligned and focused on the business value, what do we have to work with? What data exists in what format and at what availability and quality?
To state this concisely, we have the following necessary phases that will lead us to success.
1.    Alignment – A common focus with enterprise level buy in.

2.    Discovery – An exploration to ascertain our resources and an evaluation to ensure it supports the common focus.

3.    Strategy – The actual strategy that is an outcome of “What do you want” + “What do we have”.

4.    Requirements – The plan of how to get there from here.

Now, we are ready to “Go” forth and multiply! We are ready to build! And we know what we are building (requirements) and how the effort will benefit the organization (strategy). We know what we really have to work with (discovery). And finally, we have those committed at the top who are committed at the deepest levels of the effort and will both support/defend the effort as well as ensure that its accepted and reused across the enterprise.

Putting it all together let me suggest the following methodology…

 

Sometimes we are asked “Why are you just sitting there? Do something!” We need to rally and fight the urge to just do something. We need to change that around as ask “Why are you just doing something? Sit there” (and get focused, aligned, discover, produce strategy, birth requirements…then we can “Go” and do something excellent).

The difference between a commodity and a partner is the level of time you invest in the relationship.
Take the time to do it right and it will be celebrated!

~ Scott Felten

http://makingdatameaningful.com/tag/bi-methodology/