Endeca Quantifies Results Softly
March 24, 2011
Per a recent post on RFPConnect.com of the same title, Endeca Latitude Generated a ROI of 330% over Three Years According to an Independent Study conducted by Forrester Consulting. We think of Forrester as one of those mid tier consulting firms which have discovered that a blend of marketing, charm, and customers paying for objective reports helps keep the lights on.
And those are some results Forrester’s experts have unearthed!
Gathered from four companies across four different industries, nary a hint of a frown about Endeca’s business intelligence software solution.
Here are some of the highlights:
- Improved labour productivity associated with data analysis.”
- Parts and materials purchases savings.”
- Improved labour productivity associated with data discovery.”
- Engineering change orders avoided due to non-optimal part selection.”
- Cost avoided associated with user training.”
- Cost avoided associated with data preparation and report creation.”
Okay!
Endeca’s VP of product management and marketing notes that this study has successfully defined something that is typically thought of as a “soft benefit”: decision making. We think the reason why this benefit is so often considered “soft” is because it is actually kind of immeasurable.
I am an engineer, mechanical, PE, and the rest of the drill. As an engineer, I like facts, data, and verification. Disappointed in soft analyses? Well, I would not want to engineer a solution on soft data. But that’s just my conservative, non-marketing nature.
The write up reminds me of an infomercial, the as-seen-on-TV Bender Ball and the claim that the Bender Method of Core Training helps provide a workout that is up to 408 percent more effective than the standard crunch.
Really?
Don’t get us wrong, this is an amazing revelation and the results sound great, but somewhat hard to believe given the absence of verifiable data.
Sarah Rogers, March 24, 2011
Freebie
Protected: Do You Need SharePoint Therapy?
March 22, 2011
Consultant Asserts the Obvious
March 20, 2011
Years ago, I worked at the former blue chip consulting firm Booz, Allen & Hamilton. At that time, the firm was generating studies of world economic change, updates to the definitive discussion of new product development, and ground breaking studies in technical innovation methods. Now we learn that executives are distracted. Okay.
I learned about this obvious statement in “Executives Say They’re Pulled in Too Many Directions, According to Booz & Co. Survey.” According to the write up:
“The survey results tell us that deciding on priorities is a huge issue for companies – and that actually linking priorities to decisions is a hurdle that few companies get past. We see this ‘incoherent’ operating environment across industries and geographies, among all types of companies. It’s draining – and forcing companies to pay a significant penalty. We call it the incoherence penalty,” said Paul Leinwand, co-author of the just-released book “The Essential Advantage: How to Win with a Capabilities-Driven Strategy” (Harvard Business Review Press, December 2010).
When I read this, I thought about the type of research and marketing that consulting firms are forced to do to maintain their revenues. Some firms have become more like boutique marketing shops. Others are emulating PageRank and looking for topics that generate clicks. Booz seems to be blazing a path by putting numbers behind what most business professionals know. In a meeting, no one pays much attention. Distractions are the name of the game. People come and go, and most don’t know anything about Michelangelo.
I relate almost every thing I read to search and information access. I wonder how distracted executives can make good decisions. I thought about consulting firms trying to sell obvious generalizations to procurement teams more interested in fiddling with iPhones than figuring out whether the technical explanations were on point or even accurate.
The Booz study offers some evidence that we live in a PageRank world. No wonder it is hard to find valid, useful, substantive, actionable information.
Stephen E Arnold, March 20, 2011
Metadata Are Important. Good to Know.
March 16, 2011
I read “When it Comes to Securing and Managing Data, It’s all about the Metadata.” The goslings and I have no disagreement about the importance of metadata. We do prefer words and phrases like controlled term lists, controlled vocabularies, classification systems, indexing, and geotagging. But metadata is hot so metadata the term shall be.
There is a phase that is useful when talking about indexing and the sorts of things in our preferred terms list. That phrase is “editorial policy.” Today’s pundits, former English majors, and unemployed Webmasters like the word “governance.” I find the word disconcerting because “governance” is unfamiliar to me. The word is fuzzy and, therefore, ideal for the poobahs who advise organizations unable to find content on the reasons for the lousy performance of one or more enterprise search systems.
The article gallops through these concepts. I learned about the growing issue of managing and securing structured and semi structured data within the enterprise. (Isn’t this part of security?) I learned about collaborative content technologies are on the increase which is an echo of locking a file which several people edit in an authoring system.)
I did notice this factoid:
IDC forecasts that the total digital universe volume will increase by a factor of 44 in 2020. According to the report, unstructured data and metadata have an average annual growth rate of 62 percent. More importantly, high-value information is also skyrocketing. In 2008, IDC found that 22 to 33 percent of the digital universe was high-value information (data and content that are governed by security, compliance and preservation obligations). Today, IDC forecasts that high-value information will comprise close to 50 percent of the digital universe by the end of 2020.
There you go. According to the article, metadata framework technology is a large part of the answer to this problem to collect user and group information, permissions information, access activity, and sensitive content indicators.
My view is to implement an editorial policy for content. Skip the flowery and made-up language. Get back to basics. That would be what I call indexing, a component addressed in an editorial policy. Leave the governance to the government. The government is so darn good at everything it undertakes.
Stephen E Arnold, March 16, 2011
Freebie
Google Reinvents the Management Wheel
March 14, 2011
I used to work at Booz, Allen & Hamilton and I have done work over the years for other traditional management consulting firms. One thing about MBAs: Most of the folks from the top 20 schools have a shared base of business and management baloney. Mention a buggy whip and MBAs will shout, “Automobile seat covers.” Mention money and some will say, “Investment banking.” At Booz, Allen, at whatever level I was pegged in that pre-break up, blue chip outfit, I have to fly on a different plane. The idea was that if my plane went down, the project team would survive. Just slap in another person with the pedigree and the client would not know the difference. Think of replacing a Lego block when one goes missing.
I read in my hard copy of the New York Times the story “Google’s Quest to Build a Better Boss.” You can for a short time, I think, find a version of the story online at this link. (When I checked the link, I saw an ad for the Economist. Wow.)
What caught my attention was the verbiage about how Google applied its analytic method to figure out what makes a good boss. Now keep in mind that Google has lots of employees and is in the process of getting a new boss, Larry Page. I don’t think Mr. Page has worked at a sweat shop like a former blue chip management consulting firm, but that’s okay. The Googler human resources unit has generated a list of what a manager must do to be successful.
Surprise. A manager does not have to be a programmer. Got it. I have worked for some very astute managers over the years. None was a programmer. There was an aeronautical engineer, a retired three star general, a nuclear engineer, and a liberal arts major whose father founded a must-have magazine in the 1940s. Management is different from technology management in my opinion. Running an R&D operation that implements learnings from AltaVista.com experiences is one thing. Avoiding trouble with the European Commission, the Justice Department, and next door neighbors like Oracle and Apple is a different kettle of python scripts.
Now Google has identified that there are eight attributes that a manager has. Most of these fall into the buggy whip category, but for the New York Times and for Google, the eight are new. Please, read the eight tips and check off which of them you know. I particularly like the one that suggests one fit into a team and listen to colleagues. Helpful that one.
Several questions and comments from the goose pond:
- If Google had implemented these management tips, would the company have avoided the brain drain to Facebook?
- With a different management approach, would Google have been able to devise an approach to certain markets that would keep the company in China?
- Using the eight techniques, would Google be able to provide customer support to licensees of the Google Search Appliance to expand and extend that product’s reach? Someone told me that Google has placed upwards of 30,000 Google Search Appliances since the product’s launch? (I estimated that the actual GSAs in use was under 10,000, but what do I know? Competitors target GSA licensees as high potential prospects.)
My view is that the management method of “controlled chaos” does not work. The eight rules for management strike me as an admission that a different and more traditional approach to management is needed at Google. The big question, “Is it too late?”
If Google’s forthcoming Facebook competitor does not work, my hunch is that Google may need to rethink a number of processes. The methods of the MBAs might come in handy. Google does not have to go beyond this query. Just my opinion from Harrod’s Creek this fine morning.
Stephen E Arnold, March 14, 2011
Freebie
IBM, OmniFind, Yahoo: What Is Next in Search?
March 8, 2011
I was pointed to this link from IBM’s website, stating that effective September 22, 2010 the Yahoo! Edition of OmniFind was withdrawn from marketing. Further, after June 30, 2011 the product support line will be nullified as well. Why the cancellation? There is an announcement letter attached, though it offers no insight. It does, however, indicate that no replacements will be made available. I tried tracking down some additional information on this free version of OmniFind and its demise, to no avail. So what happened? Was it not popular enough, too limited? Was it Lucene? Does anyone care? We do find IBM quite fascinating for a $100 billion company on Jeopardy, fighting crime in New York, and cracking medical problems with Nuance. Diverse for sure.
Our view is that with Microsoft getting cozy or at least semi-cozy with Yahoo, IBM’s OmniFind unit saw the writing on the wall. The result is that the “free” and severely limited IBM Yahoo search solution was pulled. What will take its place? Our first thought was Watson. Then we realized that Watson may be more appropriate for limited domain searching like medical information. The Jeopardy public relations stunt was a marketing play. Configuring Watson to replace Lucene based OmniFind is probably not a practical solution at this time. As a result, IBM will have to either create a new demo of its enterprise search software or just roll out the full system with some limit on its use.
In short, IBM like other big outfits seems to have some challenges in the enterprise search department just as Google, Microsoft, and Oracle do. No wonder the third party solutions are probing the enterprise for licensing deals. Stay tuned.
Sarah Rogers, March 8, 2011
Freebie
Capacity Planning in SharePoint Server 2010
March 1, 2011
“Storage and SQL Server Capacity Planning and Configuration (SharePoint Server 2010)” explains how to plan for and configure the storage and Microsoft SQL Server database tier in your Microsoft SharePoint Server 2010 environment. The article states:
“Because SharePoint Server often runs in environments in which databases are managed by separate SQL Server database administrators, this document is intended for joint use by SharePoint Server farm implementers and SQL Server database administrators. It assumes significant understanding of both SharePoint Server and SQL Server.”
With that as a given, the capacity planning is outlined through several steps. There is a summary of the databases installed with SharePoint Server 2010 and directions for estimating the IOPS. The article recommends that you run your environment on the Enterprise Edition of SQL Server 2008 or SQL Server 2008 R2.
The write up advises you on choosing a storage architecture, disk types, and RAID types. There is a table of guidelines to estimate memory requirements and some advice on network topology requirements. The Configure SQL server section advises that SharePoint Server 2010 was meant to run on several medium-sized servers rather than a couple of large ones. The final point in the article provides general guidance for monitoring the performance of your system.
This article makes me glad that I am not a database administrator. With the huge volumes of data that are found on SharePoint, it can be difficult enough to wield as a front-end user. It reminds me that the more data one has, the more important indexing and semantics become for navigating the wealth of information that someone else plans how to store. Keep in mind that Search Technologies can assist you with your SharePoint capacity planning from the perspective of searchability.
Stephen E Arnold, March 1, 2011
For Search Technologies
X1 Management Change
February 23, 2011
We have noted a number of management changes in the search and content sector.
Now X1 Technologies has appointed a new leader for their eDiscovery division. X1 Technologies Appoints John Patzakis as President of eDiscovery, citing his extensive background in eDiscovery and corporate compliance as well as his knowledge of the law.
“I am pleased to welcome someone as accomplished as John to the X1 team,” said John Waller, CEO of X1 Technologies. “John’s background as a senior software executive coupled with his deep understanding of compliance and discovery law make him a perfect fit to lead our efforts in the eDiscovery market.”
X1’s eDiscovery Search Suite allows users to search data stored in over 500 different files types and applications. This allows for quick retrieval of electronically stored information (ESI) for early case assessment. X1’s support of social media applications will be released this quarter. In Patzakis, X1 has found a leader with the experience and skill to push them forward in the eDiscovery sector.
Emily Rae Aldridge, February 243, 2011
Nadella Ascends, Search Fuzzy
February 16, 2011
The Microsoft Search Head Gets a Big Promotion after 19 years of service in the Online Services Division.
“Microsoft announced today that Satya Nadella has been promoted, gaining the title ‘President of Microsoft’s Server and Tools Business.’” He is moving up to “oversee the overall strategy, engineering, marketing and product development for Microsoft’s server, tools and cloud platform efforts.”
In his previous position with Online Services, Nadella oversaw several Microsoft breakthroughs such as the release of Bing, new releases of MSN, and the assimilation of Yahoo! across Bing and adCenter.
Nadella’s seeming success with Bing has given him the opportunity to oversee Microsoft’s new venture into cloud computing, the subject of their latest major ad campaign. The “cloud” is being widely marketed to consumers, and Nadella’s promotion signals that Microsoft is looking for Bing –style success in their drive to push cloud computing software and services forward.
What’s this mean for search at Microsoft? We think the home grown search system in SharePoint is probably going to be killed. The future, bright as it will be, depends on Fast Search & Transfer’s ageing technology. How will search look from Mr. Nadella’s lofty perch? Probably not too important is our guess.
Emily Rae Aldridge, February 16, 2011
Freebie
What Has Google Learned from Salesforce.com?
February 15, 2011
Several years ago, a Googler made a comment about Salesforce.com. My recollection is that the person, no longer laboring in the Elysian Fields said, “We really like those guys.” The “those guys” referred to Salesforce.com. In one of my Google briefings, I mentioned that Google was not yet ready to get married to Salesforce.com. Google did some flirting but nothing serious.
I read the oddly named article “Could Google Risk Taking on the CRM Market?” Despite the headline, the main idea of the article is sound. The question becomes, “Will Google compete with the big dogs in customer relationship management?” Now CRM is an ambiguous phrase. For some poobahs, CRM is nothing more than a reason to sell a search and retrieval system so the “customer” can look up his or her own answers. The idea is for the licensee to fire staff or outsource to customers and low wage workers as much of the annoying queries from paying customers. CRM is a refuge for search and retrieval vendors who find the competition too stiff for the big jobs which go to companies with modern, scalable systems that work as information platforms. CRM is a smaller fish pond and the fish are not the predators found in the Fortune 1000 market.
I see the future… Source: http://reason.com/blog/2011/01/10/the-cbos-crystal-ball
Others, like Salesforce.com, see CRM as a way to keep track of prospects, proposals, and the detritus essential to closing a deal. Sales professionals, as you may know, live or die by their contacts. Putting those contacts in a system that the boss can tap for reports is a hot idea for some senior managers. Mercenary sales professionals use systems like Salesforce.com to manage their professional life. No matter what happens on the job or when a laptop is ripped off, the sales person’s contacts are safe in the Salesforce.com cloud.
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
