Big Consulting Firm Smashes the Big Data Conundrum
August 9, 2016
I read “Cracking the Data Conundrum: How Successful Companies Make Big Data Operational.” The high level, super sophisticated, MBA quivering report is free. Does that mean that Capgemini Consulting is trying to drum up business? I thought these top level outfits generated 90 percent of their annual revenue from repeat business? Perhaps today’s economic climate is different?
The report is interesting because the premise is that Capgemini has solved a “conundrum.” This is a nifty word which I learned when I was a wee lad trying to keep my tutor in Campinas, Brazil, happy. I recall that the word was used by one Thomas Nash (no, not a relative of the Nash made famous with the quip “the golden trashery of Ogden Nashery). But that neologistic meaning has a fresh charge of meaning for me; to wit:
A term of abuse for a crank or a pedant.
Today the word is popular among the MBA set as a solvable problem. However, a conundrum can be another word for dilemma. That’s a logical word for illogical statements; for example,
Bruno was gored on the horns of a big, angry dilemma.
What does the Capgemini document suggest is the resolution to the problem of Big Data.
The write up tells the reader that most outfits trying to integrate Big Data into every day work life screw up. The fancy wording is:
Successful Big Data implementations elude most organizations.
That’s bad for the organizations, and I assume really good for consultants who know how to deal with wasted money.
The problem? Organizations’ management are not able to manage. I learned:
Our research revealed that the top challenges that organizations face include: dealing with scattered silos of data, ineffective coordination of analytics initiatives, the lack of a clear business case for Big Data funding, and the dependence on legacy systems to process and analyze Big Data.
Imagine organizations have these flaws. What are they to do?
Step one is to get their act together; that is, organize for Big Data. Sounds good. But what if the organization is set up to do something else; for instance, make men’s shirts or do publicity of a Hollywood motion picture?
Well, these outfits need to have a systematic approach to Big Data. And one size does not fit every organization. Capgemini identifies four ways to put the ponies in the circus wagon. These are:
- Scattered pockets of Big Data stuff
- Decentralized Big Data stuff. (How is this different from “scattered pockets”?)
- Centralized Big Data stuff
- A Big Data business unit. (This is the one that delivers the most “success.” I am not sure for whom however.)
How does an organization move from total loser in Big Data to a successful outfit integrating Big Data into operations? This effort, which will be billed either as a flat fee, a retainer, or time and materials basis, is an “implementation journey.” I have a hunch that this trip will not a 10 walk to the convenient store for a bottle of Big Red soda pop. The trip will be a hike through the Ural mountains in winter.
The write up includes a test. This makes it easy for the shirt maker in Bangladesh or the 20 somethings working from a trailer in Orange County to put their act in the circus’ center ring.
The write up references a survey conducted in 2014. I suppose in the slow moving world of the shirt makers and Hollywood publicists a year and a half is a reasonable time interval.
If you want to test your understanding of the word “conundrum,” you will want to read this free report. Only you can answer this question: Does conundrum reference a crank or pedant or a hapless MBA dangling from a sharp horn? Whenever horns of a bull enter a conversation, other stuff may follow.
Stephen E Arnold, August 9, 2016
Comments
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
