for Information Management Blogs
NOV 23, 2010 3:18pm ET

Blogroll

Passion For ... Data

Print
Reprints
Email

I get pinged with a lot of opinions about data and information from entrenched personalities who have been around our business a long time. I also hear from newer voices with newer ideas. Most all of them are very smart. Some are engaging, a few are eccentric and still others are inexplicably defensive even as they ask for a meeting. But pretty much all of them are passionate about data.
 
We need all these people because data isn't a riveting subject to your average man on the street. Only certain persons see adventure where most see ones, zeros, flat files and drudgery. And we could all use some inspiration to raise it up a notch and hope another generation will follow these footsteps rather than the latest round of pop culture. 

So with no apologies to Lady Gaga or reality TV, I was happy to get the assignment to write the cover story for our latest magazine profiling Suzanne Yoakum-Stover. I hope you will read this story because it might inspire you like it inspires me.  

Suzanne is a trained scientist who deals with ultra-large scale data in the field of military intelligence. Catchy subject, yes, but also a place where you can find a person smart enough to challenge precepts of data with science and theory in ways it has not been tested before. You don't have to agree with her to tie into what her story says inspirationally about a career or an intellectual pursuit.

Suzanne's story is oddly enough a bookend to a conversation I had with Chris Anderson at Wired magazine a couple of years ago. Chris is a much more famous author who claimed at the time that data no longer needs scientific theory because it could speak for itself and that was all that mattered! He advocated a rubber bracelet stamped "WWGD" as in "What Would Google Do" an odd concession to faith for such a modern intellectual.

I disagreed with some of what Chris said, but I felt his passion. And despite his contrary view, I see something eerily similar in the way Chris and Suzanne talk about data and how it plays out in our future, maybe sooner than we think. Both are leaders, not camp followers or new product drones, which makes it all much more fun. 

I grew up watching movies in which a young Tom Edison or Marie Curie argued their findings before skeptical scientific societies who harrumphed outrage at every bit of new thinking. We triumphed with them when the astounded crowd finally saw they were right. I admit it was hopelessly quaint, but by contrast, change now comes so fast that we take big evolutions for granted with no time to reset precedents or review with our peers, and to me, that's kind of sad.

That's the second reason I am excited about data at this moment because we're setting up our own "irregular gathering of very interesting people" to talk about ideas surrounding information -- with no one's endorsement necessary.

Our first event will happen in New York December 9, and is open only by invitation to our select list of 25 Top Information managers and their peers in the working world. Suzanne will give a keynote and we'll have panels on the future of job skills, regulations, the distributed workplace and how we'll manage and lead such a place.

I'd like to find ways to open this idea up soon to a broader community, and your suggestions are welcome. In the meantime we'll have a taste of this in a DM Radio Special Edition broadcast next Monday you might want to tune into that will feature some of the same people. The idea is to challenge convention, lead instead of follow, but mostly get down to meeting people with interesting ideas about data.

That's how you get back to passion -- for data or anything else -- and I wish it for you and me and all of us. I hope you'll consider suspending your disbelief and jump in, just for the fun of it.

Advertisement

Comments (8)
Having trained as a scientist, then mid-career transfer to data architecture (no regrets) I share some of Ms. Stover's perspectives. I am struck by the lack of rigor and discipline in IT compared to chemistry and physics. Information community foundations are governed by technology vendors with understandably commercial interests rather than the objective academic community. Even the IT name implies information is a subordinate adjective to the central noun technology. The early work of Codd and Date that represented data in terms of relational calculus was a ground breaking first step. I am startled how little that perspective has matured over 30 years. When I read articles like "How to Show the Value of Data Modeling to Management", I just want to say "REALLY?". "Maybe we can discuss the Phlogiston Theory of fire after that." As critical as data/information/knowledge are to today's economy/national security/quality of life, it's frustrating to see how slowly information science is understood and adopted compared to the dizzying pace of technology.
Posted by Bob C | Wednesday, November 24 2010 at 10:47AM ET
There is a reference contained in this article that goes back to observations made by the author in March 2009. Those observations are relevant today. But, rather than "suspend my disbelief," that success is elusive as Jim suggested in 2009 and press on, I prefer to share my observation on achieving success and suggest a strategy for achievement.

My 25 years of experience tells me that a passion for data is something that we technologists enjoy. A passion for extracting knowledge from data is what the business enjoys. Back in 2009, Jim suggested that reacting to the same old messages of business alignment, quality data, and silos of data were not enough. I suggest that these are all symptoms of a business that does not have a passion for deriving knowledge from data.

I have seen many projects with brilliant technology fail even when the technologists were passionate about the data. I have also seen failures on projects where the business had a passion for knowledge but no understanding of data. I have rarely seen projects fail where the business had a passion for knowledge and an understanding of data. I have never seen a project fail when the business leader saw the data and knowledge about the business as one and the same.

My hypothesis is as follows: (1)the marriage of a passionate technologist with a passionate business leader has a 50-50 chance of success, (2)teaching a technologist with a passion for data about the business has a less than 50% chance of success, (3)teaching a brilliant business strategist about information management has a better than 50% chance of success, and (4)instilling a passion for data in a passionate business leader has a 100% chance for success.

So what is the strategy for success? Hitching your wagon to the right business leader may never happen because you may never find one. I learned somewhere along the way that when considering problems with uncertain outcomes the best strategy is to invest your money on the items that eliminate the most uncertainty. Invest the time to make business leaders "information aware" and if you are lucky, passionate about it.

Posted by Tom K | Wednesday, November 24 2010 at 11:01AM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.

Blog Archive for Jim Ericson

Lighting the Borders of Information Management
Data Governance in Context
Big Data: Bring Popcorn
In IT, More Needs to Be Less Too
Mainstreaming BI

More from Jim Ericson »

Blog Index »

Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Login  |  My Account  |  White Papers  |  Web Seminars  |  Events |  Newsletters |  eBooks
FOLLOW US
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.