When is it time to think about implementing a BI system?
In this article, I want to share personal observations of the following process. As companies go from the point “We have enough standard reports in the corporate accounting system” to “Report preparation requires a lot of time and resources. It's time to automate everything! ” I hope that the statement below will help someone to avoid some mistakes and choose the right Business Intelligence solution (BI platform).
The management of the company has a need for regular reporting (sales, plan-fact, financial condition, etc.). Reporting is prepared by specialists from relevant business units (financial unit, commercial service, logistics, etc.). In these units, people are forced to combine their main responsibilities (record keeping, contract maintenance, etc.) and reporting. From the tools they have standard reports in the accounting system and Excel. And with the use of Excel, they are usually not all right.
Then, appetites of managers grow (the company grows, the number of managers grows, managers come with a new look at business, etc.), and they begin to request more and more one-time (ad-hoc) reports to look at the business from different angles. With the growth of the company, there are more and more such reports, some of them are moving to the category of regular ones, and business professionals have problems with preparing all this diversity on time. In search of rescue, they are beginning to require IT to take over some of the work, namely, they are asking for various downloads from the accounting system base (US) and are increasingly turning to the requirements to develop new reports in the US.
')
After all these processes in the company begins to form a direction, called the business "analytics". So, a SQL developer may appear in the company (from this point I started the journey) and specialist / you who own Excel and other programs from the Office suite. Development at this stage can take place in different ways. I personally saw that with time, the number of analysts could become quite large (each division acquires 1-2 specialists or a separate division is formed in the company). Incidentally, I could have been in this role, but I was lucky that I wasn’t taught Excel at the university and, at the first interview, an aunt from the HR department said “ah-ah-ah”. My assurances of her that I quickly (in a couple of weeks) will master this product, most likely, gave rise to the thought: “The self-confident fool is clearly in front of me, because we have other aunts working on computers for years and still fear this beast, and this impudent shack says so. " Personally, I was quickly bored with creating different uploads, and I began to wonder what is appropriate in the market. But in 2006, I still did not even know the term BI, so the searches were short-lived. I stopped as a result of technology OLAP.
As it seems to me, OLAP is already a fairly common thing, and with a high degree of probability there appear people in the company who have worked with OLAP-cubes as users or developers. They sow the idea that the introduction of cubes will get rid of many problems and make life easier for a large number of employees. Or this person had experience with a certain BI-system. Since now it’s probably not about the largest companies, then people offering something from SAP Business Objects, IBM Cognos, Oracle BI will stop listening when they see the price tag. In large companies, for a long time, there is something like yes, at least Microsoft BI (SQL Analysis Services and Reporting Services). “At a minimum” is not neglect here, it's just that these are fairly common solutions, since they are bundled in a database server, which often leads to the choice of this particular platform.
Since we all want our project to grow good, kind, strong and healthy, it is important not to make some typical mistakes.
How does this happen? Since this person can be either a high-ranking person or a very pro-active IT specialist, who prefers certain products, no time is allotted for the choice of the system, but what these people have lobbied is simply bought. This may lead to the fact that the selected product does not really take root in the company and, having solved some problems, will replace them with others.
I think that before choosing you should answer at least the following several questions (I wrote about this in more detail in the last article ):
I would like to add here to add a question about which I did not speak earlier:
I will explain the essence of the issue. In some systems, you can quite simply divide the functions as follows: IT is responsible for the development of data models, and analysts are already engaged in dashboards, reporting forms are what end users see. Why is this? Requirements for the appearance of reports often change more often. Plus, the same report (data set) can exist in several variations for different customers. In addition, the design is still important aesthetics,to which there is not always a matter that does not have enough time for IT, their business is for all this to work. This is especially important if you have good developers with a BIG salary.
In order to avoid the problem, the therapy must be started in time. It is good if at the 2nd-3rd stages IT systematizes the needs, answering the first question and pushing the business to the question of introducing BI. At these stages, customers are enthusiastic and ready to discuss different options, and most importantly - to formulate their requirements, which, in my opinion, is the main task of business users in this project (again, see the previous article).
It happens that before the introduction of the automated reporting system, no one bothered that it would still be nice to have a data warehouse (DWH). As a result, this leads to the fact that OLAP or reports address a large number of data sources, various storefronts, which were formed in the 3rd stage. From this chaos is born. Developing and maintaining the system after this becomes extremely difficult, and it may turn out that everything will have to be built anew.
The selection of a system for DWH also needs to be given a separate time, but often this is the same DBMS on which the accounting system (CS) works. Such an approach is fully justified, since the company already has product specialists and may be able to save on licenses. Of course, this does not apply to the case when a lot of data is being accumulated in a CSS (a large number of transactions and a DBMS was chosen for this purpose) and it is better to search for another DBMS that is more suitable for analytics tasks (there are column storage mechanisms, placement of tables in RAM, and .P.).
Another option is to integrate the accounting system with some BI tool (I saw 1C + QlikView offers, from some integrators), but here I am not quite aware of how everything works. I would be glad if someone wrote about this in the comments or in a personal.
Often, companies get stuck for a long time in the second stage and this leads to the fact that there are many different data marts, heaps of Excel files with macros for data processing and, of course, no one systematizes and describes this. Starting as a result of a BI project, you will spend a lot more time systematizing requirements, and you will have to face some resistance from users who have long been accustomed to what is. For example, they will not want to work with cubes on their own, because Vasya from IT has always done the necessary unloading for them, thereby spoiling them greatly. Everything must be on time!
In conclusion, I would like to say that it’s good when you can spend time meeting with integrators to familiarize yourself with various systems, but I saw this only in a very large company, where the cost of the DWH + BI project was estimated at hundreds of thousands of dollars. There was the interest of management (responsibility for the budget), and the interest of implementers (large order). And all this year. In small companies, this is simply impossible. Unfortunately, I haven’t met integrators (maybe I’ve been looking badly) providing extensive expertise. Usually they concentrate on 1-2 products. He personally communicated with 10 integrator companies in approximately the following way: 2 engaged in Microsoft BI, 2 - QlikView, 3 - Cognos BI, 1 -Tableau, 1 - Cognos and Microsoft, 1 - QlikView and Tableau.
In general, be prepared for the fact that the responsibility for the choice and the future fate of the project will be borne by you - the readers of this article, which, I hope, will somehow help you.
Stage one . Prelude.
The management of the company has a need for regular reporting (sales, plan-fact, financial condition, etc.). Reporting is prepared by specialists from relevant business units (financial unit, commercial service, logistics, etc.). In these units, people are forced to combine their main responsibilities (record keeping, contract maintenance, etc.) and reporting. From the tools they have standard reports in the accounting system and Excel. And with the use of Excel, they are usually not all right.
Stage Two . Excitation.
Then, appetites of managers grow (the company grows, the number of managers grows, managers come with a new look at business, etc.), and they begin to request more and more one-time (ad-hoc) reports to look at the business from different angles. With the growth of the company, there are more and more such reports, some of them are moving to the category of regular ones, and business professionals have problems with preparing all this diversity on time. In search of rescue, they are beginning to require IT to take over some of the work, namely, they are asking for various downloads from the accounting system base (US) and are increasingly turning to the requirements to develop new reports in the US.
')
Stage Three . Conception (Embryo).
After all these processes in the company begins to form a direction, called the business "analytics". So, a SQL developer may appear in the company (from this point I started the journey) and specialist / you who own Excel and other programs from the Office suite. Development at this stage can take place in different ways. I personally saw that with time, the number of analysts could become quite large (each division acquires 1-2 specialists or a separate division is formed in the company). Incidentally, I could have been in this role, but I was lucky that I wasn’t taught Excel at the university and, at the first interview, an aunt from the HR department said “ah-ah-ah”. My assurances of her that I quickly (in a couple of weeks) will master this product, most likely, gave rise to the thought: “The self-confident fool is clearly in front of me, because we have other aunts working on computers for years and still fear this beast, and this impudent shack says so. " Personally, I was quickly bored with creating different uploads, and I began to wonder what is appropriate in the market. But in 2006, I still did not even know the term BI, so the searches were short-lived. I stopped as a result of technology OLAP.
Stage Four . Disposal of IT from ad-hoc or the birth of OLAP. Beginning of a BI project.
As it seems to me, OLAP is already a fairly common thing, and with a high degree of probability there appear people in the company who have worked with OLAP-cubes as users or developers. They sow the idea that the introduction of cubes will get rid of many problems and make life easier for a large number of employees. Or this person had experience with a certain BI-system. Since now it’s probably not about the largest companies, then people offering something from SAP Business Objects, IBM Cognos, Oracle BI will stop listening when they see the price tag. In large companies, for a long time, there is something like yes, at least Microsoft BI (SQL Analysis Services and Reporting Services). “At a minimum” is not neglect here, it's just that these are fairly common solutions, since they are bundled in a database server, which often leads to the choice of this particular platform.
Since we all want our project to grow good, kind, strong and healthy, it is important not to make some typical mistakes.
Error one . Spontaneous system selection.
How does this happen? Since this person can be either a high-ranking person or a very pro-active IT specialist, who prefers certain products, no time is allotted for the choice of the system, but what these people have lobbied is simply bought. This may lead to the fact that the selected product does not really take root in the company and, having solved some problems, will replace them with others.
I think that before choosing you should answer at least the following several questions (I wrote about this in more detail in the last article ):
- Who is the system intended for (who is the main consumer)?
- What are the company's preferences in how to deliver data to the consumer?
- What data volumes will you have to deal with?
- How much the company is ready to pay for all this and spend on further development and maintenance?
I would like to add here to add a question about which I did not speak earlier:
- How much functionality can be divided in the system between IT and analysts who are responsible for the preparation of presentations, analytical notes, etc.
I will explain the essence of the issue. In some systems, you can quite simply divide the functions as follows: IT is responsible for the development of data models, and analysts are already engaged in dashboards, reporting forms are what end users see. Why is this? Requirements for the appearance of reports often change more often. Plus, the same report (data set) can exist in several variations for different customers. In addition, the design is still important aesthetics,
In order to avoid the problem, the therapy must be started in time. It is good if at the 2nd-3rd stages IT systematizes the needs, answering the first question and pushing the business to the question of introducing BI. At these stages, customers are enthusiastic and ready to discuss different options, and most importantly - to formulate their requirements, which, in my opinion, is the main task of business users in this project (again, see the previous article).
Error two . Dwh or lack thereof.
It happens that before the introduction of the automated reporting system, no one bothered that it would still be nice to have a data warehouse (DWH). As a result, this leads to the fact that OLAP or reports address a large number of data sources, various storefronts, which were formed in the 3rd stage. From this chaos is born. Developing and maintaining the system after this becomes extremely difficult, and it may turn out that everything will have to be built anew.
The selection of a system for DWH also needs to be given a separate time, but often this is the same DBMS on which the accounting system (CS) works. Such an approach is fully justified, since the company already has product specialists and may be able to save on licenses. Of course, this does not apply to the case when a lot of data is being accumulated in a CSS (a large number of transactions and a DBMS was chosen for this purpose) and it is better to search for another DBMS that is more suitable for analytics tasks (there are column storage mechanisms, placement of tables in RAM, and .P.).
Another option is to integrate the accounting system with some BI tool (I saw 1C + QlikView offers, from some integrators), but here I am not quite aware of how everything works. I would be glad if someone wrote about this in the comments or in a personal.
Error three . Ignoring the fact that the project has long had to start.
Often, companies get stuck for a long time in the second stage and this leads to the fact that there are many different data marts, heaps of Excel files with macros for data processing and, of course, no one systematizes and describes this. Starting as a result of a BI project, you will spend a lot more time systematizing requirements, and you will have to face some resistance from users who have long been accustomed to what is. For example, they will not want to work with cubes on their own, because Vasya from IT has always done the necessary unloading for them, thereby spoiling them greatly. Everything must be on time!
Total.
In conclusion, I would like to say that it’s good when you can spend time meeting with integrators to familiarize yourself with various systems, but I saw this only in a very large company, where the cost of the DWH + BI project was estimated at hundreds of thousands of dollars. There was the interest of management (responsibility for the budget), and the interest of implementers (large order). And all this year. In small companies, this is simply impossible. Unfortunately, I haven’t met integrators (maybe I’ve been looking badly) providing extensive expertise. Usually they concentrate on 1-2 products. He personally communicated with 10 integrator companies in approximately the following way: 2 engaged in Microsoft BI, 2 - QlikView, 3 - Cognos BI, 1 -Tableau, 1 - Cognos and Microsoft, 1 - QlikView and Tableau.
In general, be prepared for the fact that the responsibility for the choice and the future fate of the project will be borne by you - the readers of this article, which, I hope, will somehow help you.
Source: https://habr.com/ru/post/241387/
All Articles