5 ms·
There's a cost/benefit curve here. Having data can undeniably be useful. The question is, how much ROI does the insights in the data provide, relative to the c
by lukev 4y ago
There's a cost/benefit curve here.
Having data can undeniably be useful. The question is, how much ROI does the insights in the data provide, relative to the cost to build the organizational infrastructure capable of extracting these insights?
And there's a bootstrapping problem, because often it's hard to calculate the potential ROI without actually going through the work of building the infrastructure to process the data.
- nonrandomstring 4y agoIndeed, absolutely true. And furthermore, sometimes the value of data, and of possible other sources, doesn't emerge until you start analysis and then deductively see new collection opportunities. It's a to-and-fro process. > how much ROI does the insights in the data provide, relative to the cost to build the organizational infrastructure Having seen the workings of academia for a long time now I'd argue very little. But I think the problem is more subtle. A Heisenbergian problem. When data collection involves people you have a triple problem of intrusion, distraction, and ossification. the act of trying to create a "data driven culture" in some contexts simply kills what's there. The cost of this, in addition to the bootstrapping costs of sensors and analytics are paralysing. Academia, by its very nature, if properly functioning, demands to be dynamic. If it's good, it will not stand still long enough for you to look at it. And if you measure it "too hard" it will evaporate as all the good people who resent ossification leave.