|
|
|
|
Solving the Information Management Puzzle
Making Information More Important than Technology
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Putting Technology in Its Proper Place
Since long before computers, information management has been influenced far more by how technology works than by how information works. The legacy influence of technology is so intrusive that some fifty years after the introduction of computers, information management is still based on, assumes, and is severely limited by pencil and paper concepts. Despite what we tell ourselves, we have been busily automating pencil and paper limitations, not information.
Both information and computers
are badly underutilized.
By turning information management right side up … by making technology fit how information works instead of perpetuating an unintended tradition of force-fitting information to how technology works, we create information management that:
 |
Solves all information possibilities for all situations, once and for all |
|
Is wholly independent of any "platform" (present and future) |
|
Never becomes obsolete having the intrinsic ability to evolve and change as business and technology evolve and change |
|
Replaces the traditional collection of separate, costly, high-maintenance, half-measure, non-integrated systems with a coherent, all-purpose meta-system. |
|
Eliminates most of the activities and costs of conventional information management |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
What the IT Industry
Has Never Understood
|
|
|
|
Standard practice Information Technology is simply bad information management. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preoccupied by how technology works the IT industry knows very little about how information works, assuming without question ... or evidence ... that standard practice IT is good information management. It is not!
|
We feel the pain but don't easily see the cause because success is measured by how we use technology, not by how we use information (like judging a house by how we use a saw instead of by how we use lumber). |
|
Assuming knowledge of information we have never developed, we plan poor information management and don't know it, perpetually reinventing incomplete systems and solutions for some information functions while others have never been addressed. |
|
Systems are designed to provide the least informational benefits ... the least business benefits ... at the highest cost. |
|
|
|
|
|
Well over half of information management costs are due,
not to how we use computers, but to how
we fail to use information. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Key to the Information Management Store
Because information is so poorly understood system development has always been an exercise in reinventing new ways to solve the same old information usages because situations, but not information usages, are unique (like designing a new car every time we plan a different trip).
|
|
|
|
No system has ever required we invent
a new way to use information. Information usages are exactly the same in all situations. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Information is unique to each situation; information usages are not! Though not all usages apply equally to all situations (a particular usage might be needed five times in one situation and not at all in another), from an information usage point of view all systems are functionally identical.
|
|
|
|
By solving information usages as they repeat in all situations, we solve all systems at once. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Business uses its information as it needs, when it needs, without suffering software development. Neither business, nor information, nor systems are locked into the relative handful, costly-to-create, and inherently limited usages of situational solutions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's Much More to
Information than Meets IT |
|
|
|
|
Understanding technology does nothing to help us understand information. The assumption that it does obstructs real comprehension. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Solving the IT dilemma requires thinking about information without getting mind-stuck in techno-speak. By looking at information uncontaminated by the artificial demands of technology:
|
We identify and eliminate standard practice but unrecognized information failures built into conventional IT |
|
We solve all information usages for all situations instead of perpetually reinventing the half-measure solutions intrinsic to conventional systems |
|
Systems are tailored to a situation by properly identifying what a business's information is instead of having to programmatically tell a computer what to do with it. (Conventional system development, with poorly developed concepts of applied information, never properly identifies information.) |
|
Users get results by being able to use their information for all possibilities as needs arise instead of being limited to only those results we happen to think to program into a special case system. New results derive with no new software development whether or not a particular usage was anticipated within the situation. |
|
Information is managed as part of a cohesive, congruent whole ... as part of a meta system ..., instead of being fragmented into piecemeal, limited information, situational systems (e.g. accounting, inventory, payroll, ERP, CRM, enterprise models, etc.) . |
|
The need for fragmented, half-measure, limited information systems is eliminated (not the need for the results they provide but for the extraordinarily costly, clumsy, least benefits way of getting them). |
|
The need to constantly develop and re-develop fragmented, half-measure, limited information computer systems is eliminated. |
|
We finally fit technology to how information works instead of force-fitting information to the arbitrary clumsiness of how technology works. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By making information more important
than technology, we vastly improve
how we use both.
Information management budgets
are slashed
by more than half.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For More (and better) Information Contact:
Dick From
Informationalist
|
|
