Data – Information – Knowledge

I often work in situations where people struggle with some fairly basic definitions for what knowledge is. You can “Google” the term or look at any number of white papers and articles on knowledge management, but I prefer to use a real-world example which seems to help get the point across (well it works for me anyway!).

Now this is a very simple example and is intended to try an make the point about when data becomes information becomes knowledge. Consider the following example and ask yourself what’s more useful to you as a business traveller, then decide what a computerised travel booking system might be able to use:

Data

• 26Oct08 28Mar09 123456 – LHR 14:20 5 SEA 16:01 BA49 747 0

• 26Oct08 28Mar09 - - - - - -7 LHR 14:20 5 SEA 16:15 BA49 777 0

• 26Oct08 28Mar09 1- - -56 - LHR 17:10 5 SEA 19:05 BA53 777 0

 

Information

• Effective from 26^th October 2008 until 28^thMarch 2009 there is one daily British Airways flight that departs from Heathrow to Seattle, this flight departs in the afternoon at 2:20PM.  On Mondays, Fridays and Saturdays there is an additional flight that leaves at 5:10PM.

 

Knowledge

• The BA49 is usually a Boeing 747. If you are travelling alone and want to get the best premium economy seat on the plane, use the on-line checking system 24 hours before to request row 28, this is usually an aisle which only has one seat in the entire aisle, so there is plenty of leg room to stretch out and room for hand-luggage.
• If you can’t book it on-line, get to the check-in early, the crew refer to this internally as the “Captain Kirk” seat so if you ask for it using this nick-name you stand a much better chance of getting it.

What this does not answer is how you transform data into information into knowledge? how do you enable the capturing and sharing of knowledge? and how do you keep all of this current and in a usable form? 

Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard – Technology Perspective

When using the Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) to score an infrastructure capability from a technologyperspective, you should consider the following and score using the NIMM scale of 1-5:

• How mature is the functionality provided by the technology?
• Does the technology follow generally accepted industry standards?
• How mature and transparent is the ability of the product used to tolerate and recover from component and environmental failure?
• How well does this technology contribute to maintaining an integrated and standardised IT infrastructure?

Consider the following qualitative measures when scoring a capability against this perspective:

• Dependable, manageable & scalable
• Ease of acquisition, deployment, integration and disposal

Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard – People & Organisation Perspective

When using the Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) to score an infrastructure capability from a People & Organisationperspective, you should consider the following and score using the NIMM scale of 1-5:

How well suited is the providers organisational structure suited to the effective delivery of this capability in order to:

• Ensure satisfaction of end users with the functionality provided
• Deliver the appropriate service levels
• Seamlessly integrate this capability into existing business processes or transform them
• Organisational responsiveness & communication

How well suited is the organisational structure and people readiness of the consuming organisation to ensure the maximum potential benefits are realised from this capability?

Consider the end user experience in terms of:

• Accessibility
• Convenience
• Functionality

Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard – Information Security Perspective

When using the Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) to score an infrastructure capability from an Information Securityperspective, you should consider the following and score using the NIMM scale of 1-5:

• How mature are the IT security measures in place to ensure the trustworthy delivery of this capability?
• How mature is the security model for authentication and access in the use and delivery of this capability?

Consider the following qualitative measures when scoring a capability against this perspective:

• Security and IG Compliance is architected in not added on
• Contribution to protecting IT infrastructure, business data and minimising the risk of business disruption
• Trustworthy, auditable and standards based
• Openness in the delivery which supports the identification of issues

Self Assessment – The Working Out is More Important Then The Answer

I was facilitating a self assessment workshop using the NIMM Balanced Scorecard which I have developed, on the call were a number of senior IT operations people from a large organisation providing IT services to several thousand users.

I decided to kick off the session by getting the group to self assess the way the do end user provisioning, ie someone joins the organisation and is provided with the IT equipment and services they need to do their job. The first perspective we started with was the process perspective. I ran through what I think makes up this perspective then I sat back and listened to the conversation amongst the IT team.

The group discussed how requests for new accounts actually get initiated, this typically comes from HR or the recruiting manager, they talked about a standard word document that is used by HR to request the equipment and system  access the new starter would need. Many times during this conversation they used the word standard or talked about there being a generally accepted (if not formal) way of doing things.

What I also observed on the call was that the group were starting to suggest to each other better ways of doing things, ie. ways to optimise what they currently do. One example was to replace the document with an on-line work-flow that was better then sending around word documents to individuals for their action.

So, after a very useful debate on just one aspect of the NIMM Balanced Scorecard, the consensus amongst the group was that they were at NIMM Level 3 (Standardised) for the Process Perspective and along the way they had come up with a number of way to optimise this and get themselves to NIMM Level 4 (Optimised).

The key take way for me was that the process of doing the working out was probably more important then the end score since it helped achieve a common consensus on where they were as well as identifying for themselves a number of way to improve their own maturity.

Final thought … What is going to add more longer term maturity value, enabling experience based self assesment, or, a third part creating a set of questions and a check-list which has to be completed and sent away to be scored?

Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard – Business Value & Strategy Alignment Perspective

When using the Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) to score an infrastructure capability from a Business Value & Strategy Alignmentperspective, you should consider the following and score using the NIMM scale of 1-5:

• How well does the delivery of this capability align to and support the achievement of the organisations strategic goals?
• How mature is the ability of the organisation to understand and realise the potential benefits that this capability brings?
• How transparent are the benefits, costs and risks associated with this capability?
• Is there a standardised and mature approach in defining, measuring and managing the TCO?
• How mature is the strategy in realising the business value and return on investment?
• How well does this capability exploit the Enterprise Wide Agreements and other preferential purchasing schemes

Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard – Process Perspective

When using the Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) to score an infrastructure capability from a process perspective, you should consider the following and score using the NIMM scale of 1-5:

How mature are the processes that enable, support and manage the delivery of this capability?

• Are the processes authoritative, generally accepted and followed?
• How mature and optimised is the automation and workflow supporting the processes?
• How mature is the management of process quality & consistency and documentation?
• Do these processes follow generally accepted best practice? 

How mature is the ability for the consuming processes to realise the potential benefits that this capability brings to the organisation?

• Have the processes that use the capability been modified to that they can benefit from what this capability has to offer?

IT Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard

One of my key goals in developing the NIMM was to try and create guidance that can be interpreted and applied locally were services are delivered and where ultimately the benefits of improved infrastructure maturity are actually going to be realised.

Anyone who has been to one of my NHS presentations will have listened to me talk about knowledge based self assessment being at the heart of what I am trying to achieve as opposed to question based auditing. The feedback I have had so far is that this knowledge based self assessment approach is much more scalable and re-useable since it encourages local IT Infrastructure managers to get a deeper understanding of their capability maturity by benchmarking themselves against a set of KPIs and Critical Success Factors.

In order to help drive this I have developed what is essentially an Infrastructure Balanced Scorecard (IBSC) that can be used for any infrastructure capability. As it’s name implies, the goal of the IBSC is to present a number of different perspectives that when considered help you arrive at a “balanced” view of you maturity for the capability being assessed.

I have chosen 5 perspectives to be used when self assessing maturity, these are shown below:

I will create a post providing my definitions of these and how I think these perspectives can be used to help NIMM self assessment.