For their feet run to evil, and make haste to shed blood.
Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.
Alexander Pope, An Essay on Criticism
I’m not a psychologist, and people who read my blog will know this for sure. But I would like to examine the notion of wanting something so much that at best we don’t enjoy it when we obtain it, or worst still, that our eagerness means that we will never obtain that which we truly want.
In his way, the great stoic Seneca of Cordoba warned us against what I would call “destructive eagerness” and its influence. Oscar Wilde also lamented that “each man kills the thing he loves”. Whilst Charles Caleb Colton commented that “patience is the support of weakness; impatience the ruin of strength”.
I have been in the field of Data Warehousing ever since Bill Inmon typed the last word of his ground-breaking and defining tome, Building the Data Warehouse, and I am proud to say that I have been on the same page as Bill with respect to Data Warehousing ever since.
Many Data Warehouse projects have not been the resounding successes that they could have been. Many people give reasons why these projects fail. Most of the reasons given are really peripheral excuses. But that’s human nature.
In the early days of Data Warehousing I was involved in implementing the Inmon approach. An approach that worked like a dream. We weren’t dealing with high volumes of data, but the business benefits didn’t come from volumes of data, but form the quality, relevance, timeliness and usability of the information supplied. The computer industry didn’t take much interest in us because we didn’t need massive big iron, and we were at the time (1993/1994) in an oddball sort of project for Europe.
As use of Data Warehousing expanded at Compaq, iteration by iteration, we were on track.
Then things started to heat up when we began to think about data volumes approaching 1 terabyte.
All of a sudden – okay, not so sudden – the traditional hardware vendors saw an opportunity, and the less traditional relational DB vendors as well had mega-buck dollar signs in their eyes.
Data Warehousing might eventually need a lot of hardware and quite a few software licences.
So far, so good.
Then came an inflexion point.
Organisations started to be aware that a small band of corporations were having success with their Data Warehouse projects, and, well, were understandably curious.
At least two new expectations had been set.
For IT vendors, especially the big guys and gals, it was an opportunity to sell serious infrastructure. Especially as Telco’s had started to follow the previous experiences of big retailers in the use of dimensional model based analysis and reporting.
For organisational IT departments it spelled out the need to react, to respond to a mounting interest amongst senior management with this new trend called Data Warehousing.
There was only one problem.
Both had forgotten about the fundamental imperatives that should drive useful, sustainable and justifiable Data Warehousing.
For IT departments it spelled the need to do something. For IT vendors it became the need to maximise sales; that is, also to do something.
From there on in things went awry.
It didn’t matter that the defining characteristics of Data Warehousing were ignored, it was enough to be doing something, to be building something, to be selling a lot of something, anything. Activity, buying and selling was of the essence.
Of course, IT bought, built and presented (sometimes), and in many cases were told by business stakeholders that their gifts were useless, or worse than useless.
How tragic is that?
The IT vendors were so eager to sell, and the IT departments so eager to please, that their joint eagerness became counter-intuitive and destructive.
Of course, in most cases they weren’t doing Data Warehousing, they were simply ‘experimenting’, and calling those ‘experiments’ Data Warehousing.
This was how Data Warehousing was fragged by the friendly fire known as “destructive eagerness”.
Both the IT vendors and the corporate IT departments desperately wanted to do the right thing. But there were hidden risks, false friends and other complications.
If I look back into the history of IT I see so many examples of “destructive eagerness”.
Maybe you can also recognise this phenomenon in your line of business.
For I would love it – and I’m sure others would as well – if people would ‘pony up’ their own experiences in this respect. Because as George Santayana stated “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”.
In future blogs, and with your help and guidance and input, I will expand on this theme.
Thanks for reading.
As always, please share your questions, views and criticisms on this piece using the comment box below. I frequently write about strategy, organisational, leadership and information technology topics, trends and tendencies. You are more than welcome to keep up with my posts by clicking the ‘Follow’ link and perhaps even send me a LinkedIn invite. Also feel free to connect via Twitter, Facebook and the Cambriano Energy website.
For more on the topic, check out my other recent posts:
- Why Destructive Eagerness? The Data Warehouse Example
- Big Data and the Vs
- Did Big Data Kill the Statistician?
- Infotrends 2015: 21 Directions in Information Management
- On not knowing Climate Change
- Big Data Robitussin – Big Data: Read all about it!
- Absolute certainty…
- Mugged in Data Hell
File under: Good Strat, Good Strategy, Martyn Richard Jones, Martyn Jones, Cambriano Energy, Iniciativa Consulting, Iniciativa para Data Warehouse, Tiki Taka Pro
Pingback: Big Data is Dead! | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Mugged in Data Hell – Summary – На Бо́га наде́йся, а сам не плоша́й | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Consider this: Absolute certainty is an impostor | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Big Data Robitussin | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Infotrends 2015: directions in Information Management | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: On not knowing Climate Change | The Good Climate Blog
Pingback: Consider this: Did Big Data Kill The Statistician? | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Marty does… Big Data and the Vs | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Leadership 7s: Management Talking Points #1 | The Good Strat Blog - Organisational Strategy and Information Management
Pingback: Big Data Predictions for 2017 | GOOD STRATEGY