I’ve used to believe that certain documents were unnecessary burden for projects, especially collecting all this signatures… Well, I got smarter meanwhile, and I see exact purpose of gathering all signatures from all participants at one hard copy. Now, I like list with signs of all experts, administrators, analysts, and etc., that contributed on workshops with their input.

It is difficult to force creative person to stick to the “nasty” bureaucratic papers, but… when problems appear, and when those who accuse understand very little business intelligence and information systems problems. Those papers are becoming survival kit. Sooner or later all projects come to crises and than it is more then recommended to have written signatures of all participants at the final document – specifications of requirement, testing and acceptance, project documents, and etc. This is especially recommended for any work that does not have strong management sponsorship.

Those who have signed final documents will not try to transfer guilt on their paper. This is sometimes main advantage of signature list.

Signature List is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

It’s a kind of mantra for business intelligence vendors. “With business intelligence technology you’ll get single point of truth”. “You’ll not have any more problems and doubts about figures, which figure is correct.”

This a nice idea but this is also a fairy tale for business people with too much money.

Company information needs are enormous and this would mean that company needs many single point of truth from the Information Systems. At the certain point, single point of view_id1 will look very similar to single point of truth_id2. What is our truth that we need, id1 or id2?

There are no systems on Earth that can provide copy/paste figure from business intelligence or any other reporting information systems unless somebody deeply filtered and processed all information and prepared reports. And this is not done by a system but by a business and financial analytics. Somebody needs to prepare it and this is core information knowledge.

Why is knowledge about designing of single point of truth so important? It is the methodology and definition issue more then IT issue. Companies need permanently more and more information. Any future change in information demands will be costly charged because company does not know own information basis.  In addition, if company does not know how single point of truth is made, how can it guarantee quality of official reports?

Companies need to know their information basis in details and should not be afraid to use it. Companies should not outsource preparation of single point of truth to somebody else because needed knowledge will reside out of the company. Methodology about how information are designed and why will stay out of company or at the wrong place.

Single Point of Truth is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

Before, when product portfolio was simpler, market was less demanding and dynamic (less chaotic), it was relatively easy to find business analytics and to ask them for advise. How to check out calculation, what is the reference, how process functions, do you agree with analysis quality and etc.? Ordinary coffee break gossip

 They did not know everything but they knew a lot. Corporate knowledge was integrated and was reachable. Quality was “guaranteed”.

With speed-up of product portfolio life cycle, its diversity and management plus market demands, numbers of dimensions and mesures required from Reporting Information Systems multiplied exponentially and are still growing. They simply exploded because business and financial analytics tasks exploded. Tasks are now more complex and much more demanding. Not to mention more often…

Nowadays, coffee breaks more serve fro psychological therapy for business analytics veterans with post combat syndromes. “I do not know where is everything going”, “It does not make any more sense”, “Our systems will implode”, …

To shorten, nobody is sure in anything anymore. Business analytics gurus are not sure in their knowledge any more. For every question additional analysis is needed. It is demanding and frustrating.

Corporate knowledge is broken into many pieces.

Corporate knowledge is broken to more processes and experts, holding their own world of facts and knowledge. For plausible business analytics today, there is a permanent need to join all pieces of knowledge together. Everything influences everything, and everything is information connected.

There is no way to recognize in business intelligence output what somebody did in production system on product code list with new attributes. Or, there is no way to be aware in reports of tiny and small changes in processes on “small” production system in factory. There are to many possible influences that are not documented and stabilized through information systems. Why? Market dictates fast speed and quick changes in information systems…That’s why.

Companies need to resolve new demanding task of complex business analytics and to establish process of integrative knowledge generation. Business analytics can not alone integrate knowledge, they are excellent business analytics but for knowledge integration you need excellent communicator in business analytics. Ain’t that totally controversial task for introverted mathematical gurus? Two persons in one…

 There is a way but it can not be provided through any IT technology.

Pieces of Knowledge is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

There is no strict definition of what Information Systems for Finance are, but there is a need to somehow define it. The necessity is produced from organizational and process organization of work. Who is the owner, who is in charge for what, who will lead and who will approve, what will be approved? These are everyday questions and to deal with them in a dissent manner financial data and information flow needs to recognized and organized.

There is a strict business need to have experts in Financial Division who have to administrate financial processes like cost allocations, cost centers, cost and revenue categories, accounts, and many more. Someone has to edit figures and this can be only done in departments within Financial Division.

Please, be aware that only being steward and not knowing information processes is not enough anymore. Financial division cannot have comfort in only having financial data stewards without direct knowledge of processes and projects that shape financial systems. This is not a good strategy because it will lose essential knowledge about what do they report, plan, and forecast. Financial experts with sense of IT need to be together with data stewards in ordered to secure maximum quality of financial systems structuring. They are in charge for requirement specification and errorless process running.

This is the main need why it is important to draw line between financial systems and others.

It is a little bit awkward to talk about separate financial information flow while all transaction and operative information systems are interrelated in companies. Everything is connected with everything.

So let’s start to think about financial information systems… that should be all information flows (plus production systems) that contain information sets like revenues or costs, at least elements that are directly related with mentioned financial sets.

Market structured software products that can be relatively easy connected with costs or revenues. First of all these are ERP, Billing, Dunning systems. At the second place, planning (budgeting, forecasting and etc.) processes and systems that support them need to be also placed within financial information systems.  IT needs to be guided, not leader in shaping financial processes in information systems. 

What about other systems like CRM, SRM and similar? In the perspective of integrative reporting they are also essential for financial operations, but I would say that this data and information are of secondary importance for financial calculations. Therefore they should not be considered as Financial Information Systems.

To conclude, Financial Information Systems are ERP, Billing, Dunning and Business Intelligence systems related with planning, budgeting and forecasting. All other information systems are matter of discussion.

Additional Information:

http://www.answers.com/topic/financial-information-system

Financial Information System is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

Data are raw figures from transaction systems that are gathered, archived, and delivered to information consumers like marketing or finance for processing and decision making. When data are placed in relations, in context, they become information. Information is received and understood message, and information is data placed in context while data is out of context. More in Data, Information, Knowledge, Wisdom post.

Data quality can not secure correct report publishing. Provided data can be of highest quality but if administrator that publishes reports or business analytic that publishes analysis misinterprets data, result will be poor information quality for decision makers. For example, report may show raising trend of bundle service but the reality is that it is decreasing. It may be due to false data presentation and not recognizing how to deduct new complex process from figures. Information duplication happened. Data set provided to reporting administrator was correct and detailed enough, but administrator did not recognize on time in data mass need to apply new formula in report. Nobody sent additional note to administrator and report with error was sent.

I’ve seen too many attention on data quality processes, problems, and how to improve it, Data Quality in Information Systems, Data Quality in Data Warehouse and etc. There has been too little documentation about improvement of information quality. There is little knowledge about improvement of reporting structures and processes. Data Quality is an issue for first reporting part - data provisioning, and as already stated this is very well covered. Read more in previous post Reporting Parts.

For improvement of information quality it is necessary to build processes of permanent definition updates and processes for effective communication between analytical experts for knowledge consolidation. Nobody can know everything about company processes, but team can.

Data Quality vs. Information Quality is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

Press the button report. This is very widely spread belief, especially in management structure.

Reports can be automated since there are:

• Technologies like Business Intelligence, Data Warehouse, Management Information Systems and etc.,
• available Analysts,
• great IT support,
• and enough HW resources.

This is not a guarantee that corporate information flows can be totally automated and this is prejudice. It is prejudice despite enormous investments into Reporting Information Systems if company competes on dynamic markets with permanent mutation of products and services.

There are too many unstructured data and exceptions in processes that need to be overcame. Reporting structures can be established but they will be outdated with first change in information flow that was not planned and covered with reporting information system functionality. Even with minor change, in one reporting line distorts prepared automated report. It is not automated report with push the button feature but reporting problem.

Changes are permanent, and there are to many undefined variables that influence final result of reporting processes. Instability, everything influences everything, nobody is sure in what is going on, data forensic is very often activity…

Reporting can not be completely automated under this conditions.  

What can be done?

Well, company needs to restructure its resources in order to efficiently respond to reporting quality saturation.

Reporting is the mixture of three ingredients. One is very obvious, it is the data from source systems, Data warehouses and business intelligence systems. These are data from company information flow. Companies usually focus all their forces for data quality here.

Second part is a little bit hidden but are also essential - definitions. By definitions are meant set of standards, policies, terminology, reporting definitions, making relations between information. These are rules that determine data quality. This is very often missing in companies – book of definitions for key performance indicators, knowing what you measure and what are dependencies.

And finally third reporting part is knowing what is going on. Reporting person has to know business, thoroughly. Related changes in processes may be recognized on time, by understanding cause and consequences in data. There is no technology and book of definition that can consider all possible exceptions or changes in systems. That is the reason why business logic analytics need to establish communication processes in order to prevail possible errors on time. Before official reporting process is released. 

All three parts together are kind of data quality providers and gatekeepers. One missing part leads to reporting     data, definitions and know how about processes. If one ingredient is missing then there is a huge possibility to report wrong figures.

Reporting Parts is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

“If you just enjoy what you’re doing, it is very likely that you’re doing it wrong.”

“If you perform the impossible, the only consequence will be that the boss will add it to
your usual duties.”

“If you go later from the job, nobody will notice. If you go early, you will meet boss in the parking.”

“If there is less job to be done, it will be made slower.”

“Always do exactly what your boss would do,… if you knew what he said and meant.”

“When you do not know what to do, walk fast and look concerned.”

Friday Thoughts is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

What is decision transparency?

For me, it is the resulted (current and future – decreased for inflation) accurate cost and revenue contribution per decision. It is summed Profit & Loss statement per decision with historic, current and future (planned) values.

One important note, decision transparency is only trust worthy if it is calculated within complete corporate picture. It cannot be calculated without internal company influences.  It cannot be calculated in corporate vacuum because decision implementation will influence human resources, logistics, sales force, design, research and development… What ever. If decision is being implemented it will influence other companies performance indicators as macro or micro influence. This is common mistake in calculation decision impact through business cases that many overhead influences are simply neglected. Neglecting leads to fraudulent calculation figures = non transparent decision effect.

Without any doubt, decision transparency may be treated as problematical on current decision making positions. Installation of advanced decision support solutions that can provide certain level of decision transparency, may hurt current management nomenclature in a way that it can show gaps in analysis that were used as basis for decision making.

But, is it their fault? It is not a disaster - management fault, if there was not proper resource for quality decision transparency provided. Resources are expert analysis, processes, time, standards and software tools. Without this “technology”, it is impossible to make calculations without gaps in revenue or cost estimations.

But, it is a disaster for company if decision makers intentionally sabotage implementation of decision making metrics.

Why would current executive management have interest to show that they had failures and admit weak decisions? They can do their job and move further in year or two as successful worker – moving to other “challenges”.

Mistake is not mistake, but as the mistake is considered proactive and brave decision. How many brave decisions company can survive until values are wasted?
It is not an easy decision to include transparency on decision levels and undercover previous wrong decisions with names of decision makers. Introducing transparent decision making process is hard and tough political decision.

We have figured out how to make decion making process transparent and it is documented within Total Controlling Concept.

Transparent Decisions is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

I’ve seen so many materials arguing about decision support, decision making, decision management, how to improve decisions and etc. How to improve profit, efficiency, boost business, improve this and that…

Actually, I see that wrong concept is highlighted. To be more precise, it is good to have better decision environment without any doubt but argues on how to improve them with business intelligence, DSS, BPM and similar software solutions is secondary issue. Less important. 

Main problem of all this materials is that they are not taking into account view from above. Decision with top view means that it has to be processed, step by step through decision process levels, but in relation with other decision models! Individual decision/decisions targeting only one segment of business are local. They cannot function as independent process without complete company and all actions that are happening in complete company. So, analysis of decision and all materials I went through are considerations about local decision solutions, local Decision Support Systems.

Here is the example, implementation of advanced sales force based upon implementation of state of the art decision management system. Improvement of sales force with advanced and customized portfolio is doubtful since costs and business activities are raised in other company segments. Decision management system used to improve sales might worsen other company indicators. What is the worst, this influences on other company segments. They are hard to identify and to measure. This means, decision was local but effect was global. Local decision affected overall company performance on revenue and costs.

What is missing is INTEGRATION. Integration with other activities, processes, decision models, financial statements. Only this environment can provide correct decision support system solution. That means DSS has to act for company as ONE HEAD, One Leader, One vision… Management board, executives need to have one DSS environment over the top of all decisions.

It has to be only one head that will prepare integrated DSS…

Integrated Decision Support Systems is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.

Implementation of new Application like Customer Relationship Management (CRM) can be very tricky. Maintenance and operation of old CRM system is demanding and at certain point of development needs to be leaved. Needs to be switched to new CRM that is at certain level of deployment, not completed yet. 

This is crossroad where old solution needs to be leaved, and switch to new solution must be done. Parallel work needs to be supported just in case if switch fails. Parallel work cannot last very long, and it is very demanding and stressful for business and IT resources. Initial loads into new solution can go quite smoothly but incremental loads… they are the real challenges for complex Information Systems.    

At one point of switching process there is no way back. There is no return to old application if at ending stages of deployment new solution starts to show significant errors: functional, structural, conceptual… unpredictable to be more precise.

No way back is a post from: Business Intelligence Secret Solutions If you'd like to read more about Business Intelligence, Decision making solutions and much more please download your copy of Business Intelligence PDF.