Big. Really big

"Information Management is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to IM."

What Douglas Adams would have said if he was in my position.

 My role includes the words Information Manager in the title and that's where the confusion begins. Only 1 person in 100 knows what it means. A further 10 in 100 think that they know what it means - but when pressed for an explanation you will get at least 11 different interpretations.

It's hardly surprising that the wider business community is unsure about what IM is. So just to set the record straight, here's what I believe IM is:

• Data quality – to create high quality information.
• Metadata management – to clearly define all elements.
• Data integration – to bring the data together for all management processes to use.
• Analytics – processes data to reveal hidden meaning.
• Business Intelligence – delivers insight to the people and processes making decisions.
• Performance Management – uses consistent and uniform measures of core entities (departments, staff, customers, products, accounts, etc.) to optimise operations.

 

Comments

[Lina]

Hi there. I think your stats leaves me with more work than anwasrs. I can't use it to answer simple questions like, how many people wrote something using my widget? (yes, if I use a calculator). How many people used the snapshot functionality? I can't choose a period of time and the timezone thingy jumps back to default if I reload. Really these stats suck. Almost useless. I think you should devote some hours here or offer something else to us newbies. Otherwise half of this tool is no good. /Ole

[Ruby Badcoe]

If data is managed correctly, information management can be done easily. Information is derived from data. Therefore, it should be organized and well-managed from the start to result in a good flow of information. Businesses must see to it that data gathered are also accurate. I guess it’s getting more dynamic now, since the practice of gathering data also includes those in mobile/ online platforms.

[RB]

I like and dislike that each organisation defines information management differently.

I like it because it shows the sheer mind-boggling size of the discipline, and each organisation SHOULD focus their efforts according to their needs and aspirations.

I dislike it because there's no conformity or standard agreed practice that brings all practioners together.

I've been in places where I'd say BI was definitely excluded from the definition which was very unfortunate. I've been in places where anything IM was considered a mere subset of the Records Management programme. And now I'd say I'm in an organisation which has limited its IM efforts to enterprise content managment, collaboration, and data integration.

Nice blog to put a line in the sand.

Would you consider Knowledge Management in scope somewhere? My summary would be more on the process side to promote the codifying, linking and pushing of personal insights wherever they're required.

[David Jaques-Watson]

I remember one business team in an organisation was called the "Management Information" team.

One re-org later, they were renamed "Information Management".

Poor bastards never knew what hit them.

[John Owens]

Some great definitions.

And yes, Information management is big. Really big.

However, there is something even BIGGER, even more VITAL. Something that brings information into existence from mere data elements.

That something is Function - the whole reason why Enterprises exist.

Function is, well, life, the universe, everything!

Regards
John