« July 2009 | Main | September 2009 »
Blogger: Lyn Robison
Getting more out of your existing information systems -- doing more with what you have -- that is a recipe for success in enterprise IT during this economic recession.
Below is a video that introduces Burton Group's MODS (the Methodology for Overcoming Data Silos) as a way to get more from your existing information systems.
You can download a free report on MODS by clicking here.
Blogger: Lyn Robison
Whenever I talk about innovative ways to use XML in enterprise IT, people often object by asserting, “You can’t use XML to do that! XML is only …” and then they go on to dogmatically describe their particular perspective of XML’s narrow applicability. Their view might be that XML is only for configuration files. Or, they might say that XML is only helpful for transmitting and receiving data between applications. Or, they (the forward-thinking folks, anyway) might claim that XML is only useful for content. Their common theme is “XML is only…”
An extreme variation on the theme of XML being good only for narrow applications is the notion that XML is magic pixie dust that can make information float effortlessly across the enterprise to any businessperson who needs it.
From my perspective, XML is not quite pixie dust, but it is a nice compromise between structured and unstructured data. Of course, XML cannot handle structured and unstructured data in an ideal way (because compromises are never ideal), but XML does offer enough power around structured/unstructured data handling to be a compelling platform for information management.
My colleague Joe Maguire once explained structured/unstructured data this way: when people go into a restaurant and look at the menu, they intuitively understand that the list of entrées is structured data: the name of the dish, its description, its price. When people read the paragraph or two of text on the back of the menu about the history of the restaurant, they intuitively understand that they are looking at unstructured data in the form of flowing text. Humans can easily understand these two “meta-models” (structured data and unstructured data) and we can easily switch between them. Computers, on the other hand, have more difficulty.
In enterprise IT, we use DBMSs to handle structured data. We (the forward-thinking folks amongst us, anyway) recently figured out that we should use XML to handle unstructured data. Until recently, we stored unstructured, document-centric data in proprietary document repositories, or we just parked documents as files on network file shares. Now it is apparent that an XML database, such as MarkLogic Server, is the best way to handle unstructured, document-centric data. MarkLogic Server holds the position in the XML database market that Oracle held in the early relational database market: they are offering the first commercially viable product.
Productivity applications, such as Microsoft Office, use XML (OOXML) as their native file format. The XML capabilities of Oracle, SQL Server, and DB2 are not as robust as MarkLogic Server’s. (MarkLogic natively understands OOXML and can process enterprise data directly within Office documents, but inexplicably, the big three DBMSs cannot.) However, the big three DBMSs at least can render their structured data as XML. Cloud-based applications tend to favor data that is in XML. We are reaching the point where all of an enterprise’s data can be stored and processed as XML. Stay tuned. XML is going to become a powerful platform for information management in enterprise IT.
Blogger: Lyn Robison
An interesting article in the New York Times asks, "Are the Glory Days Long Gone for I.T.?" I would say, yes and no. Yes, the glory days are gone in that we will never return to the way that enterprise IT was a few years ago. But no, the glory days of IT are still ahead if we as IT people are smart enough and open-mined enough to adapt and innovate.
Productivity is the (best) way out of a recession, and an interesting blog post in the Wall Street Journal echoes Alan Greenspan’s opinion that enterprise IT materially contributed to the productivity of the U.S. economy during the 1990s. The WSJ blog also says that IT lifted productivity again after the 2001 recession.
The WSJ blog post says that productivity is up again now (which fact is verified here), but largely because businesses have laid off their unproductive employees. The WSJ warns that “unless a new source of productivity besides nimble labor markets emerges” the recovery from this recession might not be as long-lasting as in the 1990s and 2000s.
Enterprise IT has brought the economy out of recession twice now by improving productivity (during the 1990s and again after the 2001 recession). Can we in IT be that “new source of productivity” yet again?
I think we can. The 1990’s productivity gains came as a result of the conquest of data silos in the supply chain (according to Alan Greenspan). The WSJ says that after the 2001 recession, the productivity gains came from the conquest of data silos beyond the supply chain in manufacturing, and into the “wholesale and retail trade (dubbed the Wal-Mart effect)”.
I believe we have an opportunity now to conquer data silos throughout the entire enterprise. (One way to do that is using MODS, which you can learn more about by clicking here.) The technology exists for us to do this today. We in IT just have to become open-minded and forward-thinking enough to use it.
Blogger: Lyn Robison
The Securities and Exchange Commission has made XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) filing mandatory for publicly traded companies. Beginning June 2009, XBRL filings were mandated for companies worth $5 billion or more. XBRL filings for other public companies will be phased in over the next two years.
So, how's it going so far?
It’s a bit early to tell, but a recent Reuters article that quoted a study (by three North Carolina State University professors) on XBRL financial reporting expressed concern about how prepared companies are to post their financial data accurately when using XBRL. The authors of the XBRL reporting study observed, “Results of a comparison of XBRL filings to Forms 10-K reveal multiple errors in signage, amounts, labeling, and classification. These errors are serious because since XBRL data is computer-readable, users will not visually recognize the errors, especially when using XBRL analysis software.”
Transparency is the new black, and computer-based data is the medium by which organizations become transparent. Unfortunately, data management in the typical enterprise is not up to the task, which should leave executives worried about covetous fines and the potential of unpleasant jail sentences. The Reuters article observed the following.
Companies from 3M Co (MMM.N) to Dow Chemical (DOW.N) to Comcast Corp (CMCSA.O) filed documents containing various problems that the study's authors worry will undermine XBRL's credibility among the people it is intended to help.
“I think companies are underestimating the time and complexity of tagging the statements,” said one of the authors, Eileen Taylor.
The study, which covered documents submitted for the 2006 fiscal year, including omitted amounts, inaccurate values and inaccurate labeling of various numbers.
Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O), for example, reported two dollar amounts in millions instead of billions because of a data entry error, and Dow Chemical tagged some figures with incorrect dates that then affected other years' data, the study said.
“These are big errors that you would never accept,” Taylor said. “If you were hand-keying, you might notice them.”
The authors of the study note, “Companies currently have reputational and (limited) legal incentives to file accurate documents; however, expiration of the current safe harbor provisions creates a strong incentive to provide reliable and accurate XBRL filings.”
From what I can see, enterprises will have increasing regulatory motivation to get their data management houses in order. Watch for more Burton Group guidance on this in the future.
