16 Aug 2010
The Worlds of Information Management
These days, I’m pretty immersed in the world of small companies for one reason: I have been interviewing the owners of small businesses for my new book. Quite frankly, I have been blown away by many things, not the least is which the ability of these companies to effectively manage their data. In this post, I’ll explore the small and big worlds of information management )IM).
The World of Big
I have spent many years in this world, so I feel like an expert commenting on it. If you’re reading this post, then you’re probably familiar with it and its characteristics:
- Big Companies
- Oodles of employees
- Politics galore
- Big Tools (typically older)
- Big Data (often inconsistent, incomplete, or at at least partially invalid)
- Big Systems (note: always plural)
- Big Problems
In what appears to be Bizarro World, I have spent much time lately in The World of Small. Even the project that I am finishing next week involves a company with “only” an 800 employees. At least to me, this is relatively small. This is especially true since I’ve done time in organizations with more than 60,000 employees. (Well, at least we thought that that number was right.) Our systems were more than a little messy and we could never be sure. Calm blue oceans, Phil…
The World of Small
The characteristics of this other, strange wold include:
- Small Companies
- Fewer employees (by an order of magnitude)
- Smaller Tools (typically newer)
- Smaller Data
- Smaller Systems or, heaven forbid, system (singular)
- Smaller Problems
Worlds Colliding
Now what happens when those people used to one world enter the other? Worlds collide. (In “The Pool Guy”, one of my favorite Seinfeld episodes, we are introduced to George’s “Worlds Theory.” Long story short: friends and relationships don’t mix.)
When those used to working in small worlds enter big ones, they often become frustrated. The simple ability to query relatively accurate data sets gives way to much more nuanced (read: complicated) situations. Relatively simple questions are answered with complex or convoluted answers such as:
- “not really”
- “sometimes”
- “you’d think so, but…”
- “it depends”
I suspect that this is why many highly talented folks leave big companies for small ones, never wanting to return.
On the other hand, those that go from big worlds to small ones seem to feel a sense of immediate relief. They’re surprised with statements such as, “If it’s not in Salesforce.com, then it doesn’t exist.” How’s that for an IM philosophy? Or how about being able to write accurate reports via a web-based wizard that pull results in 30 seconds?
Yep. It’s a strange world.
Simon Says
Most companies lay somewhere in between these two poles. What’s more, to be fair, small companies have their own issues and it’s the acme of foolishness for me to claim that these environments are idyllic. To quote Stephen A. Smith, However….
On many levels, there’s something to be said for simple setups, consistent data, quick decision making, clear lines of responsibility, and generally better data. Even if The Big World can’t turn on a dime, shouldn’t its leaders try to emulate its smaller counterpart?
Feedback
What say you?
August 17th, 2010 at 12:20 am
So true Phil.
The biggest difference (for me) between the two is the effort it takes in larger corporations to get alignment, buy-in, whatever you want to call it. This is due to all the people, politics, culture, different business units..you name it. All have an impact on the governing policies and processes, either by taking a LOT longer to get everyone to work together towards common goals, or by the high effort re-active approach to resolving long standing issues.
Sometimes small would be nice
August 17th, 2010 at 1:29 am
Great post, Phil, and it rings very true. Going from Initiate (350 employees, but only 90 when I started working here) to IBM (400,000ish employees) has been an eye-opening experience. I suspect we’ll all learn a lot in the coming months.
August 19th, 2010 at 4:56 am
Phil, I think that you are absolutely right about the challenge of the two worlds. What is becoming interesting is how information standards are meaning that small businesses are now combining to look like much bigger entities. I’m seeing organisations who have the products of a big enterprise, but are governed by a number of small businesses. Your post highlights some of the opportunities that this trend is going to create to work in more agile environments and get the best of big and small at the same time.
August 20th, 2010 at 9:47 am
Thanks for the comments, all.
I find the differences between big companies and small ones to be fascinating. The interesting thing that I’m finding researching my new book is that the smaller companies have technologies just as powerful as their larger brethren.
Data, process, and people issues are much more complicated. This gives an advantage to smaller companies. Many are taking advantage of this.
August 22nd, 2010 at 3:34 am
Having worked in and owned a small businesses and having worked in large businesses in various roles including technology, sales, marketing and senior management to me has been a fascinating and continuous learning experience. This was all in the private sector. For the past 5 years I have had the opportunity to work in the public sector where decisions are made which affect millions of people rather than thousands as in the case of large business or tens in the case of small businesses. What I have observed is that the decision making process in small, medium and large private and public organizations is quite similar which shouldn’t be too surprising because the people behave similarly regardless of the organization’s size.
For example we think the public organizations are more inefficient or ineffective than private organizations but I have observed an equal degree of competence and incompetence in both settings. Likewise I have seen small organizations destroyed by the behavior of a few and the equivalent destruction of larger organizations as a result of the behaviors of many. Certainly cultural traits within these organizations are a significant contributing factor but you can see significant similarities in the basic behaviors of people regardless of the size or nature of the organization.
As you stated, people are complicated and therein lies the challenge. As the cliché states “it’s the people stupid”, I think should be posted on every wall in every organization. The technology and data is a reflection of the people, not vice-versa. Size of an organization is of limited consequence.
August 23rd, 2010 at 10:27 pm
“It’s the people, stupid” is a good one line synopsis of my first book.