When optimizing your data and analytics tech landscape, how do you balance business outcomes that you need vs those that will differentiate your business? For example, fixing core challenges in the architecture that hold you back vs adding new offerings that make your business stand out?

892 views6 Comments
Sort By:
Oldest
Chief Data and Analytics Officer in Bankinga year ago
This can be a challenge, as the two are often not mutually exclusive.  One has to focus on fixing core challenges in the architecture that hold you back and can optimize your data and analytics tech landscape to help your business succeed. These could be on things that could free up man hours, improve efficiency or reduce risk.  
Prioritization is key. Some challenges will have a greater impact on your business than others.  Its important to communicate to business stakeholders on the consequence of not addressing these core challenges.

Director of Dataa year ago
A complex question. The simple guidance on "How do you eat an elephant?" comes to mind here. The first step is to create a cross-functional collaboration between business and engineering teams to ensure business and "IT" goals are aligned. Evaluate the investment required against the potential ROI. Choose a candidate that can support the Proof of Technology and Proof Of Concept and then agree mutually a way forward(Agile approach). Embrace change management! Regularly assess against your objectives , and adapt to changing needs.
Chief Data Officer in Softwarea year ago
Finding the right balance between growing the business vs. running the business can often be a challenge.  In my experience your cost model here will have a big influence.  IT organizations that are directly allocated $$ from lines of business to operate can have far more flexibility vs. those who are only allocated a block of money on an annual basis. In either scenario it's critical to have full alignment between IT and the business on your roadmap and the priority of all the top initiatives throughout the year.  IT leaders need to establish a baseline for the minimum spend required to keep the lights on and maintain all existing services.  The resources left over can then be allocated across any business-led initiatives based on priority (which should be based on a combination of strategic imperative and expected ROI). Optimally, a PMO organization would be heavily involved in managing this process on behalf of IT/Data leaders.  
lock icon

Please join or sign in to view more content.

By joining the Peer Community, you'll get:

  • Peer Discussions and Polls
  • One-Minute Insights
  • Connect with like-minded individuals
Practice Head, Cognitive AI in Bankinga year ago
This is a global problem and to me the 80/20 rule worked well. 80% efforts to fox core challenges as it is your bread and butter. Also this will help strengthen your core capabilities for future technologies. 20% efforts on new value adding features as a delighted for the consumer. This means not just research but providing all resources to successfully implement the new offerings as well.
President & Chief Data Officer in Services (non-Government)a year ago
The best way to start is to prioritize different projects using a clearly defined rubric. Some of the areas to score are as follows:

How quickly can you get it done

The feasibility around making it happen (based on capabilities and costs)

Alignment with your strategic values and your mission

Expected revenue/margin

Advanced nature of the project (is it a true differentiator?)

Customer interest/requests

Number of competitors in the same space

Looking at those different things, you can score the different projects and then plot them in a quadrant priority matrix (like a Gartner magic quadrant) to understand what things you want to go after. You might need to have a portfolio of scoring dimensions on the tech side vs those on the business differentiation side, and make sure that you have at least some in each bucket reflected. So maybe you have two separate prioritization matrix charts. Or maybe you weigh things differently to make sure that you have somewhat of a balance between the two.

What it often boils down to is resources. If your revenue is the issue, it's like the chicken or the egg scenario: the things that we want to do to increase revenue we can't do because we need to fix the tech stack, but we can't afford to fix the tech stack until we get the revenue. If you don't have the revenue, then obviously there needs to be a conversation about how you get that money.

Content you might like

Director of Data4 days ago
In our implementation of Master Data Management (MDM), we primarily adopted a centralized approach using Microsoft Dataverse. This was key to resolving data quality and consistency issues in our Power Platform solutions, ...read more
1
61 views1 Upvote1 Comment

Extremely11%

Moderately70%

Slightly19%

Not at all

View Results
227 views
Director of Data4 days ago
In my opinion, Advancements in AI and related data field have significantly enhanced our Master Data Management (MDM) strategy by automating data quality, integration, and governance processes. AI algorithms help identify ...read more
1
32 views1 Comment

Cost of RPA products27%

Lack of developers who can code RPA applications44%

Amount of customization needed to automate business processes24%

Lack of RPA code maintenance resources4%

View Results
11.7k views5 Upvotes8 Comments