Yet again, I reveal the base instincts driving my interest in big data. It’s not the science – it’s the cash. And yes, on some level, I find the idea of all that cash sexy. Yes, I know it’s a failing, but I can’t help it. Maybe in my next life I’ll develop a better appreciation of the finer things, and I will begin to understand the real purpose of the universe…
Until then, however, I’m happy to write about the odd and interesting intersection of big data and big business. As noted in my newest paper, big data is driving a renaissance in IT infrastructure spending. IDC, for example, estimates that worldwide spending for infrastructure hardware alone (servers, storage, PCs, tablets, and peripherals) will rise from $461 billion in 2013 to $468 billion in 2014. Gartner predicts that total IT spending will grow 3.1% in 2014, reaching $3.8 trillion, and forecasts “consistent four to five percent annual growth through 2017.” For a lot of people, including me, the mere thought of all that additional cash makes IT infrastructure seem sexy again.
Of course, there’s more to the story than networks, servers, and storage devices. But when people ask me, “Is this big data thing real? I mean, is it real???” the easy answer is yes, it must be real because lots of companies are spending real money on it. I don’t know if that’s enough to make IT infrastructure sexy, but it sure makes it a lot more fascinating and – dare I say it, intriguing – than it seemed last year.
In life, sex is the key to survival. In business, cash is king. Is there a connection? Read my paper, and please let me know.
Get your free digital copy of Will Big Data Make IT Infrastructure Sexy Again? — compliments of Syncsort.
The trend is clear: The CIO’s IT budget is getting smaller and the CMO’s IT budget is getting larger. As a result, the CIO’s role is diminishing and the CMO’s role is expanding. From a business perspective, the shift feels inevitable. Despite talk about transforming corporate IT organizations from cost centers into profit centers, the role of the CIO has remained largely administrative.
In their hearts, most CIOs know the score. They’ve won their battle to earn “a seat at the table,” but the table has gotten smaller. The main challenges ahead of them are technical, not strategic. Their key areas of focus today are mobility, cloud, and security. They are aware of big data, but it’s just not a survival issue for them.
Big data tools are evolving more quickly than the people and organizations using them.
Way back in October 2012, mere days before Hurricane Sandy filled our basement with five feet of water, the nice editors at O’Reilly Media asked me to write a white paper on the emerging architecture of big data. That paper was followed by two more, one about the emerging culture of big data, and another about the impact of big data on the traditional IT function.
Despite my attempts to make all three papers seem wildly different, they all share a common theme or subtext, namely that the technology of big data is evolving far more quickly than the people and processes of big data.
In other words, the tools are more advanced than the organizations using them. At least that’s my takeaway. After interviewing dozens of data analysts, industry experts, and senior-level corporate executives, I’m convinced that the technology is advancing faster than the abilities of the people trying to use it.
It's not the data itself but what you do with it that counts.
This post originally appeared on Cumulus Partners. It’s republished with permission.
Quentin Hardy’s recent post in the Bits blog of The New York Times touched on the gap between representation and reality that is a core element of practically every human enterprise. His post is titled “Why Big Data is Not Truth,” and I recommend it for anyone who feels like joining the phony argument over whether “big data” represents reality better than traditional data.
In a nutshell, this “us” versus “them” approach is like trying to poke a fight between oil painters and water colorists. Neither oil painting nor water colors are “truth”; both are forms of representation. And here’s the important part: Representation is exactly that — a representation or interpretation of someone’s perceived reality. Pitting “big data” against traditional data is like asking you if Rembrandt is more “real” than Gainsborough. Both of them are artists and both painted representations of the world they perceived around them.