the path to business intelligence applications for midsize businesses

THE PATH TO BUSINESS INTELLIGENCE APPLICATIONS FOR MIDSIZE BUSINESSES

A report prepared by CFO Research Services in collaboration with Hewlett-Packard and Intel

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

Sx

Contents About this report 2

Executive summary 3

Introduction: What are business intelligence applications? 5

Turning data into information 6

Developing a metrics-driven organization 9

Active users of BI 11

Breaking through information silos 13

Finance executives’ views of IT 16

User-focused change management 17

Sponsors’ perspective 21

© 2011 CFO PUBLISHING LLC FEBRUARY 2011 1

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S

2 FEBRUARY 2011 © 2011 CFO PUBLISHING LLC

About this report

In October and November of 2010, CFO Research Services conducted an invitation-only electronic survey of senior finance executives in the United States. We received a total of 403 qualified responses, as follows:

Survey respondents hold positions with the following titles:

Chief financial officer 41%

Controller 13%

Director of finance 12%

VP of finance 11%

Treasurer 5%

EVP or SVP of finance 4%

Other senior finance management 7%

Director of planning, budgeting, and forecasting (or equivalent) 4%

President, CEO, or managing director 2%

Other 2%

Respondents come from companies of different sizes in terms of number of employees:

100–500 27%

500–1,000 16%

1,000–2,500 15%

2,500–5,000 13%

More than 5,000 29%

Respondents represent a broad cross-section of industries:

Aerospace/Defense 1%

Business/Professional services 3%

Chemicals 2%

Construction 3%

Consumer packaged goods/Food/ Beverages 2%

Education 5%

Energy/Utilities 2%

Financial services (primarily banking or credit union) 9%

Financial services (primarily non-banking, e.g., insurance, brokerage services, real estate) 8%

Healthcare providers 13%

Healthcare: other (e.g., Pharmaceuticals/ Biotechnology/Life sciences) 5%

Manufacturing/Industrial/Automotive 18%

Media/Entertainment/Travel/Leisure 4%

Public sector (e.g., government, non-profit) 6%

Technology (e.g., Hardware/Software/ Networking) 3%

Telecommunications 2%

Transportation/Warehousing 3%

Wholesale/Retail trade 11%

Other 1%

In addition, finance executives from the following companies were interviewed:

• 21st Century Oncology• Alliant Credit Union• Cherry Creek School District• First State Bank• KershawHealth• Overhead Door• Pittsburgh Mercy Health System

• Pure Fishing (a subsidiary of Jarden Corporation)• UNM Medical Group• Virginia Credit Union• Volunteers of America Chesapeake• Wescom Credit Union• An anonymous real estate management non-profit• Two anonymous midsize manufacturers

Note: Percentages may not total 100%, due to rounding.


Executive summaryIn the last quarter of 2010, CFO Research Services (CRS) conducted a survey among more than 400 senior finance executives in the United States on their views of the value and utility of business intelligence (BI) applications for managing their businesses. We also interviewed senior finance execu-tives from targeted industries: retail banks and credit unions; healthcare providers; public sector (non-profit and educa-tion); and manufacturing and retail.

For the purposes of our survey and this report, then, we are defining BI as a unified technology architecture that provides data-mining capabilities—that is, technology that allows management to systematically collect, extract, aggregate, analyze, and report on discrete data elements or metrics for a functional unit, a line of business, or an entire enterprise.

Our research program yielded the following primary findings:

Finance executives—and, in particular, those at midsize companies—are looking to adopt BI systems that can help them manage a growing body of raw performance data.

• Financeexecutivesrecognizethattheircompaniesneedto be able to turn raw data into meaningful information. As one CFO we interviewed says of his midsize healthcare company, “We have more data than we have information.” Many finance executives are either adopting or at least evaluating BI as a way to help their companies manage their data and support management decision making.

• Many companies already are using a variety of different information tools, generating large amounts of performance and financial data from a variety of systems. Data warehousing, business activity monitoring, and rolling forecasts are most widely used, with about 80% or more of respondents saying their companies employ them either moderately or extensively.

• Some of the more complex information tools, such as applications for balanced scorecards, predictive analytics, and competitive benchmarking, are not used as extensively. In particular, respondents from the smaller companies are much less likely than those from larger companies to be using these kinds of advanced tools. These companies are more likely to still be relying extensively on the use of spreadsheets and manual intervention to manage performance data.

• Gettingthedataoutofthedifferentsystemsandaggregating it into meaningful management information are among the top concerns expressed by participants in this research. A CFO in the nonprofit sector says of BI, “Apart from giving us data in a form that is usable, it would also allow us to parse meaningful information out of all the data we collect and to disseminate that information throughout the organization.”

• BItechnologycanproviderelieffromresourceconstraints and accelerate business performance. In an open-ended response in the survey, a director of finance sums up the value he finds in the use of technology to deliver good metrics: “Effective technology can allow you to leverage limited resources: people, capital, time. Accurate, timely information can mean speed to market with the right product:atruedifferentiator.”

Smaller companies are more likely to still be relying extensively on the use of spreadsheets and manual intervention to manage performance data.

The success of technology projects hinges on an excellent understanding of users’ information needs and a close match between user requirements and the technology.

• In the survey,77%offinanceexecutives say thatdemon- strating the benefits of improved analysis and decision making are very important for making the business case for technology investment. Nearly as many (71%) cite ease of use by operating units or functions.

- Respondents are looking at BI primarily to improve forecasting, planning, and budgeting (51%). They also rate improvements in data analysis (41%), decision making by corporate management (36%), and strategic planning and execution (35%) as important.

• Finance executives are looking to build metrics-driven organizations in which all levels of management routinely employ key metrics in making day-to-day decisions, as well as in setting overall corporate strategy.

- “It’s not enough simply to put a checkmark to say you have a BI system,” notes the CFO of a healthcare provider. “We have to commit to making sure that the product becomes part of management decision making all the way down to the supervisor’s level.”

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


• Respondents from metrics-driven organizations—those that report that mid-level managers, operations personnel, or both are frequent users of key metrics—are especially likely to be satisfied with the ability of their organizations and their IT systems to deliver a consolidated, consistent, and accurate set of performance data.

• At most companies represented in the survey (77%), corporate or senior management frequently use key operating and financial measures for making decisions or directing behavior, and 72% of senior business unit or operating managers frequently use such metrics. However, many companies represented in the survey, and especially midsize companies, have not consistently spread the use of key metrics below senior levels or throughout their organizations.

• The complexity and scale of a company’s data output appear to be growing beyond the capability of some organizations tomanage it effectively. A CFO from the healthcare industry sums up her frustration with her company’s inability to understand its own information needs, much less manage them well: “We don’t even know what information to gather or what to do with it if we did have it. The BI industry needs to EDUCATE potential users.”

“It’s not enough simply to put a check-mark to say you have a BI system,” notes the CFO of a healthcare provider. “We have to commit to making sure that the product becomes part of management decision making all the way down to the supervisor’s level.”

Several of the finance executives interviewed advocate for a continuous improvement approach to implementing BI, adapting it in stages to the organization’s readiness to use it.

In both the survey and the interviews, finance executives say that the IT function can provide the most value in technology adoption by developing a good understanding of the business uses for the technology and working closely with other functions to match technology capa-bilities with business needs.

• Those responsible for making the case for technology investment are not always the same ones responsible for making sure that the technology gets up and running. In most of companies represented in the survey, responsibility for preparing the business case falls on finance, IT, operations, or some combination of these functions. In a majority of companies, IT then bears responsibility for overseeing the implementation of technology solutions. IT’s understanding of business and user requirements can be key to an organization’s ability to use the technology effectively.

• Tworespondentsexpressopposingviewsofthevalueof the IT function in driving change. One says he is looking for IT to “bring up new ideas,” while the other simply wants IT to “get out of the way.” Many of the finance executives in the survey express their conviction that the IT function is most valuable when it works closely with operations and finance to understand the business and user requirements.

• A credit union’s CFO says, “The user should not be us [finance or IT]; the main user should be the rest of the organization. Our role is to provide the road, the map, and the education, so that the rest of the company is able to use the information.”


Finance executives recommend that midsize companies approach BI as a continuous improvement project, and ideally identify “power” users to take the lead both in developing the business requirements for the technology and in incorporating the technology into the business.

• ACFOinhealthcaresays,“Tomymind,involvingand empowering people at the grassroots level is essential to having a product that is sustainable and that actually becomes a part of the work life of the individual.” This CFO notes, “The biggest challenge is the cultural change of the staff…[getting] people to view the world in a differentway.”

• A credit union’s CFO says, “You have to gauge the appetite of your organization for information. If they’re not ready, you have to build for it You really do have to understand how much they can absorb, and then do it in phases and very carefully. You’re maximizing your return on that invested capital [in that way].”

• The culture at smaller companies may not be as conducive to adopting new technology to provide management information. Nearly half (47%) of respondents from companies with between 500 and 1,000 employees say that the lack of perceived value of or need for BI applications is one of their largest challenges, while only 25% of those from the largest companies (with more than 5,000 employees) say this is a challenge for them.

• Respondents to the survey as well as interviewees identify several “best practices” for successful development of new technology capabilities:

- Identify “power” users to take the lead both in developing the business requirements for the technology and in incorporating the technology into the business.

- Use pilot programs or some other means to restrict initial implementation to a limited number of users or a limited set of capabilities.

- Go slowly and build in stages to more sophisticated uses and to other users throughout the company.

Introduction: What are business intelligence applications?In the last quarter of 2010, CFO Research Services (CRS) conducted a survey among more than 400 senior finance executives in the United States on their views of the value and utility of business intelligence (BI) applications for managing their businesses. We also interviewed senior finance execu-tives from targeted sectors: retail banks and credit unions; healthcare providers; public sector (non-profit or education); and manufacturing and retail.

The CFO at a midsize credit union cautions, “You have to gauge the appetite of your organization for information....If they’re not ready, you have to build for it.”

Our research confirmed one of our underlying hypotheses: BI meansdifferentthingstodifferentpeopleatdifferentcompa-nies. In some cases, finance executives consider BI to be a standalone application that “sits on top” of existing, separate information systems—ERP, procurement, human resources, general ledger, etc.—to pull data from those systems and aggregate it for reporting out to management. In other cases, finance executives view BI as a comprehensive informa-tion system used essentially to manage all the information requirements of a business.

Under the broadest definition, BI is understood to mean any information system or application that ties together discrete elements of data from other information systems or sources. ThehighestvalueforBIisseeninitsabilitytooffermanage-ment—and, in some cases, operating or administrative staff—aconsolidated,consistent,andaccuratesetoffinancialand performance data to support decision making. For the purposes of our survey and this report, then, we are defining BI as a unified technology architecture that provides data-mining capabilities—that is, technology that allows manage-ment to systematically collect, extract, aggregate, analyze, and report on discrete data elements or metrics for a func-tional unit, a line of business, or an entire enterprise.

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


Turning data into informationIn an interview conducted for this report, Raymond Wolfe, the CFO of Pittsburgh Mercy Health System, succinctly sums up a central dilemma for many companies in these times: “We have a lot more data than we have information.”

In a separate interview, Shyam Desigan, the CFO of the non-profit social services agency Volunteers of America Chesapeake,notes,“Wehavealotofdatafloatingindifferentsilos. The goal is to integrate our operational data with the financial data and generate meaningful information.” That, he concludes, is “something that a BI solution can do. Apart from giving us data in a form that is usable, it would also allow us to parse meaningful information out of all the data we collect, and disseminate that information throughout the organization.”

The ability to monitor and collect increasingly detailed levels of data on virtually any aspect of a company’s performance has been growing exponentially. Managers are faced with the task of winnowing key performance indicators from the stacks of data their information systems can produce, and

the complexity and scale of a company’s data output appear to be growing beyond the capability of some organizations to manage effectively. For example, in our survey a trea-surer working in education writes, “[The challenge is in] determiningallof thedifferentdataelements thatneed tobe accessed to analyze. What factors do we need to look at totrulyanalyzeoureffectiveness?”Anothersurveyrespon-dent—a CFO from the healthcare industry—writes, “The quantity of data is large, and the organization has difficulty selecting what is and is not important.”

Our survey shows that many companies already are using a varietyofdifferentinformationtools,apartfromoverarchingBI applications. As seen in Table 1, majorities of respondents report using at least moderately all of the information tools we asked about:

• Datawarehousing• Businessactivitymonitoringorperformancedashboards• Rollingforecasts• Balancedscorecardoritsequivalent• Scenarioanalysisorpredictivemodeling• Competitiveintelligenceorbenchmarking

Table 1. Use of information toolsWhich of the following information tools is your organization or business using?

Use moderately Use extensively

Data warehousing 38% 44%

Business activity monitoring/ performance dashboards 44% 41%

Rolling forecasts 39% 39%

Balanced scorecard or equivalent 41% 23%

Scenario analysis or predictive modeling 47% 19%

Competitive intelligence or benchmarking 63% 16%

Many companies are already using a variety of different information tools that BI can tap into—but smaller companies, in particular, are less likely to be using the more advanced kinds of tools.


Overall, financial services companies tend to make more extensive or sophisticated use of information tools and systems; organizations in the public sector, less so. Data warehousing and business activity monitoring are most widely used, with more than 80% of respondents saying their companies employ them either moderately or extensively. Mona Leung, the CFO of the Illinois-headquartered Alliant Credit Union, mentions the value of centralizing collection and use of disparate data: “Like most organizations, we have adifferentsystemforourtransactions,adifferentsystemforlending, a different system for collections, even a differentsystem for the phone. We have the luxury of having built a data warehouse that brings that information together. Anybody can access all that information without having to worry about going into this system or that system.”

The survey also shows a change from traditional, static budgeting and forecasting methods to more dynamic rolling forecasts among nearly 80% of respondents. Rolling forecasts can give a company’s management the flexibility it needs to continuously monitor performance and make course correc-tions quickly as conditions—both external and internal—are changing. A company that has switched over to rolling forecasts, however, is even more dependent on the ability to capture and analyze an integrated, comprehensive set of data from multiple business units and information systems.

At the same time, Table 1 shows that some of the more complex information tools, such as balanced scorecards, predictive analytics, and competitive benchmarking, are not used as extensively. In particular, respondents from the smaller compa-nies are much less likely than those from larger companies to be using these kinds of advanced tools.

Approximately half (46%) of respondents from companies with less than 1,000 employees say that their companies do not use scenario analysis or predictive modeling at all, whereas three-quarters (75%) of those from companies with more than 1,000 employees report that their companies do use these techniques. In addition, the largest companies represented in the survey (those with more than 5,000 employees) are nearly twice as likely (39%) as all other companies to extensively use balanced scorecards or their equivalents. Half of the companies in the smallest segment (those with 100-500 employees) do not use balanced scorecards at all, and about half of all companies with no plans to use BI are from the smallest companies.

Differencesintheleveloftechnologyusageexistbyindustryas well as by company size. Overall, financial services compa-nies tend to make more extensive or sophisticated use of information tools and systems. For example, 43% of survey respondents from the banking sector frequently use scenario analysis or predictive modeling, compared with 19% of all respondents. Especially in the banking community, the global financial crisis of the past two years has refocused finance executives on the importance of managing information in order to manage the company.

In contrast, the opportunity to improve information manage-ment may be largest in the public sector, where—in many cases—organizations may be evaluated more on non-finan-cial or qualitative metrics for service delivery. Respondents from government, non-profit, or education organizations report that their organizations use the range of information tools we asked about with much less frequency than seen in private industry. The exception is in the use of data ware-housing in the government or non-profit sector, where usage is closer to the average. Public organizations appear to have the ability to collect and organize performance data, but may befallingshortintheirabilitytousethatdataeffectivelyinmanagement decision making.

In this sector, public education, in particular, may feel the need more acutely for resources and systems to provide an integrated management view of information. Guy Bellville is the CFO of the Cherry Creek Schools in Colorado, which embarked on an ambitious project to replace outdated legacy information systems with an integrated ERP capability. As an example, Mr. Bellville cites the value of being able to model compensation in his school system—a capability they did not have previously: “That’s a tremendous tool. Our costs are driven mainly by people, especially very complex teacher compensation contracts. When we can collect all that data together and model salaries, we gain much more predict-ability in our budget.” Especially in the aftermath of the reces-sion and the decline in tax revenues available to support public education, school administrations need the high-quality, integrated data that will allow them to manage their budgeting processes closely.

These differences in technology usage and investmentmaybe partially driven by purchase and implementation costs, but theymay also reflect thedifferentneeds andoperatingphilosophies of midsize and smaller organizations. David Gumpert-Hersh, vice president of credit risk at Wescom Credit Union, explains why his business relies less on pure processing power: “Credit unions have been more relation-ship-based—more personal than mathematical—whereas most of the international and multinational institutions are more model-driven.”

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


Ms. Leung makes a similar point about her credit union’s advantage in managing information: “At the big banks, they got to the point where it’s so complex, they couldn’t see what the problem was any longer. They have very complex models that calculate risk and economic capital, and they failed [duringthefinancialcrisis].Iscomplexdatareallyeffective?Perhaps the big banks failed because they didn’t embrace the principle of why those things were put in place. They just complied with the regulation of Basel I or Basel II, rather than understand [the purpose of ] the regulation.”

Jeff Pattison, senior vice president and CFO of CentralBancshares in Iowa, does not view his community bank’s continued use of spreadsheets as a disadvantage. “I don’t think that’s a bad thing [i.e., relying on spreadsheets],” he says. “If you’re a large global manufacturer, maybe you need to be a little bit more careful—you know, death by spread-sheet. But in an organization of this size, I think it’s just fine.”

However, a dependence on spreadsheets instead of models carries its own risks. Paul Lehmann, vice president and CFO of Overhead Door Corporation, a midsize manufac-turer in Texas, points out the risks of having to manipu-late and manage large amounts of data manually: “If you’re spreadsheet-dependent, protecting the integrity of the data is more difficult. For example, tracking material purchases by commodity type, the average price paid and how that compares to the standard and to recent history, and factoring in material usage cycle times in order to calculate the root cause of manufacturing variances—that all becomes error-prone when a lot of the data is gathered from discon-nected data storage points within un-integrated information systems.Thisriskismagnifiedwhenthestaffstartsdroppingthe data into spreadsheets to do the analyses, manipulation, and calculations. All it takes is a slight change of a column or a row to corrupt the spreadsheet’s ability to pick up the correct number. The next time you look at your results, the material variance just doesn’t look right [based on your expe-rience and knowledge of what is going on in the business]. Unfortunately, that type of error ultimately erodes the confi-dence of the executive team in the data that’s being reported.”

Similar views are expressed by some survey respondents describingtheirmostchallengingbarrierstoeffectiveinfor-mation management. A director of administrative services in the public sector writes, “Departments often do not trust the data in source systems, so redundant data management occurs, which is inefficient and undermines source system and quality data management.”

For many of the finance executives interviewed for this report, BI systems are seen as a necessary solution to the problem of proliferating data. They are pursuing BI capabilities to tie together their disparate information sources—whether spreadsheets or standalone information systems—in order to provide management with the integrated and dynamic view of overall company performance they need to make effectivedecisionsinvolatiletimes.

The CFO from a regional non-profit says, “We have a lot of data floating in different silos. The goal is to integrate our operational data with the financial data and generate meaningful information. That’s something that a BI solution can do.”


Developing a metrics-driven organization To Mr. Desigan, however, simply having the technology is not the goal in itself; it’s having the right technology. “At the end of the day, the solution is only as good as the data that it spits out,” he says. “So unless we know what is required of the programs to make meaningful decisions, we can’t archi-tect the right BI solution. It’s not like I picked a vendor and a product and said, ‘Okay, here it is—use it.’ It’s a matter of understanding how to use it correctly.”

Mr. Wolfe at Pittsburgh Mercy also notes that what is most important is “meaningful use of the product—not just having the product” itself. “It is not enough simply to put a check-mark to say you have a BI system,” he says. “It’s going to be essential that that BI system be actively used at all levels of management. We have to commit to making sure that the product becomes part of management decision making all the way down to the supervisor’s level.”

The importance of having the right information for manage-ment decision making is widely acknowledged by respon-dents. (See Figure 1.) At most companies represented in the survey (77%), corporate or senior management frequently use key operating and financial measures for making decisions or directing behavior, and 72% of senior business unit or oper-ating managers frequently use such metrics.

However, many companies represented in the survey have not consistently spread the use of key metrics below senior levels or throughout their organizations. Less than 40% of respon-dents say that either management of support or adminis-trative functions or mid-level managers are frequent users of operating and financial measures; less than 30% say that operationsstafforpersonnelfrequentlyusethesemeasures.Midsize companies may have even more of an issue with this type of “management information gap,” as 32% of respon-dents from companies with less than 2,500 employees report that mid-level managers make frequent use of key measures. At the larger companies with more than 2,500 employees, 45% of the respondents say that their mid-level managers are frequent users of key measures.

We analyzed separately a sub-segment of respondents who report that either mid-level managers or operations personnel use key metrics frequently in their decision making. In this sub-segment, 87% of respondents report that mid-level managers at their companies are frequent users of key metrics, and two-thirds (67%) report that operations personnel are frequent users. The averages for all respon-dents are only 37% for mid-level managers and 28% for operations personnel.

Figure 1. A metrics-driven business culture is characterized by information usage at deeper levels of the organization.

How frequently are the key operating and financial measures used at different levels of your organization or business for making decisions or directing behavior?

Figure 2. BI applications have a variety of planning, analysis, and management uses.

In your opinion, in which areas can the use of BI make the most significant improvements for your organization or business?

Figure 3. Next to the cost of implementing a new system, integrating BI applications with existing information systems ranks among finance executives’ main concerns.

What are the largest challenges your enterprise faces in adopting and implementing BI applications?

Figure 4. Many finance executives believe the information systems and metrics used by management are performing adequately, but they express concern over their ability to adapt systems to new requirements.

To what extent do you agree or disagree with the following statements about your organization’s use of management information?

Figure 5. The finance and IT functions frequently are heavily involved in making the business case for technology investments, as well as in overseeing their implementation.

What responsibilities do different functions within your organization or business have for evaluating investments in management information systems such as BI? What responsibilities do they have for implementing management information systems such as BI?

Figure 6. When making the business case for technology investment, finance executives place a priority on demonstrating the business benefits of technology and ensuring that business users can employ it effectively.

What factors or benefits do you consider important to making a strong business case for investment in any types of BI applications?

11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Support/administrative staff or personnel

Operations staff or personnel

Mid-level managers

Management of support or administrative functions

Management of major operating or business units

Corporate or senior management

Frequently use key measures Occasionally use key measures Infrequently or never use key measures

Percentage of respondents Respondents were asked to select up to three.

Percentage of respondents Note: Percentages may not total 100%, due to rounding.

Percentage of respondents Respondents were asked to select up to four.


Percentage of respondentsRespondents were allowed to choose all that apply.

Partial response set shown.

Percentage of respondents

1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other

Quality of regulatory complianceor accreditation processes

Effectiveness of back office oradministrative functions

Effectiveness of project management(implementation and oversight)

Risk management

Demand or market analysis

Service quality or customer care

Effectiveness of sales and marketing functions

Decision making by operating staff or management

Strategic planning and execution

Decision making by corporate management

Data analysis (variance analysis,root cause analysis, etc.)

Forecasting, planning, and budgeting

3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other

Lack of satisfactory BI offerings in the marketplace

Business disruption during implementation

Cost or difficulty of training to use BI applications

Technology silos between different informationsystems in our organization

Organizational resistance

Purchase cost of technology

Complexity or size of our organization

Organizational silos between different units or functions

Lack of perceived value of or need for BI applications within our organization

Difficulty of integrating BI applicationswith existing information systems

Cost of implementation

9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

We are able to readily adapt our information systems to changesin our business (e.g., M&A, reorganizations, new products

or services, changes in regulation, etc.).

We have access to useful external information oncustomers, competitors, suppliers, markets, etc.

Our personnel have the training and knowledge theyneed to use our IT systems effectively to support

management decision making.

Our IT systems give management the informationit needs to make well informed business decisions.

The measurements and metrics managers use allow themto make financial and operating decisions quickly and effectively.

Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

Finance IT Operations Administrativefunctions

Procurement C-suite

Prepares business case Oversees implementation

“Very important for business case”

8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Sourced from preferred vendor

Bundled or pre-packaged solution(hardware/software/services)

Compatible with vertical industry applications

Customized for our company or organization

Tailored for or specific to our industry

Payback explicitly defined

Ease of implementation

Ease of use by corporate management

Compatible with existing applicationsand technology vendors

Performance improvements explicitly defined

Ease of use by operating units and/or functions

Improved analysis and decision making demonstrated

Metrics-driven organizations

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


The CFO of a healthcare provider notes that what is most important is “meaningful use of the [BI] product—not just having the product” itself.

The organizations in this sub-segment may be characterized as having metrics-driven cultures, as they also are much more likely than average to say that corporate or senior manage-ment and management of major operating or business units frequently use key measures (87% and 92%, respectively). Respondents from these companies that employ key oper-ating and financial measures more widely throughout their organizations are especially likely to be satisfied with the ability of their organizations and their IT systems to deliver a consolidated, consistent, and accurate set of performance data. These metrics-driven organizations can be found at all sizes, from smaller (24% with 100-500 employees) to midsize (26% with 500-2,500 employees) to larger (52% with more than 2,500 employees).

Ms. Leung describes how information is used at all manage-ment levels within Alliant Credit Union: “I would look at information usage at three different levels. The board isgovernance, which is much more forward-looking, at the highest strategic level—looking at where the risks are and where the business is going. At the senior executive manage-ment level, it’s less than at the governance level but still more forward-looking, driving the direction of the business in terms of strategy.

“If you take the information down to the management level where they execute everything, then they use the infor-mation in a very different way; muchmore detail, highercontent, probably narrower but definitely more tactical, driving toward the execution of operational initiatives. For example, their job down at that management level would be to reduce credit card risk.” “But at all levels,” Ms. Leung continues, “there has to be an appetite for fact-based decisions, for very transparent and fluid information. If you don’t have a culture that promotes making decisions based on facts and information and that promotes accountability and transparency, then no matter how much management asks for information, and no matter how much information they have, they will never realize the potential of that information.”

Survey results provide some insights into the value of instilling an information culture throughout the enterprise. Two-thirds of the respondents from these metrics-driven organizations agree that the measures managers use allow them to make financial and operating decisions quickly and effectively,comparedwithonly44%ofallotherrespondents.In addition, respondents from metrics-driven organiza-tions are more likely to express satisfaction with their orga-nizations’ ability to deliver performance data that supports management decision making (75% versus 60% of all others), and to agree that their IT systems give management the information it needs (63% versus 45% of all others).

In an open-ended response in the survey, a director of finance sums up the value he finds in the use of technology todelivergoodmetrics:“Effectivetechnologycanallowyouto leverage limited resources: people, capital, time. Accurate, timely information can mean speed to market with the right product:atruedifferentiator.”

“If you don’t have a culture that promotes making decisions based on facts and information, and that promotes accountability and transparency,” warns a credit union’s CFO, “then no matter how much management asks for information, and no matter how much information they have, they will never realize the potential of that information.”


Active users of BIThe companies participating in the survey can be grouped into three categories: those actively using BI; those evaluating or in the process of implementing BI applications; and those with no plans to employ BI. Our analysis of survey results show that active users express higher satisfaction with their organizations’ ability to deliver a consolidated, consistent, and accurate set of performance data that supports management decision making. They are much more likely to agree that the measurements and metrics managers use allow them to make financial and operating decisions quickly andeffectively.

BI applications are used primarily at the corporate level. Only a handful of respondents indicate that they are actively using BI in a region, business unit, or function without also employing it at the enterprise level. Approximately half (49%) of all respondents say their companies are active users of BI applications at the corpo-rate level. These active users are fairly evenly distributed among all companies by size.

Respondents are looking at BI primarily to improve fore-casting, planning, and budgeting (51%). They also rate improvements in data analysis (41%), decision making by corporate management (36%), and strategic planning and execution (35%) as important. (See Figure 2.) These results hold true regardless of company size.

Active users of BI are more likely to rely on key metrics at senior management levels, and they are much more likely to make better use of information tools such as scorecards or performance monitoring.

BI may also be seen as a way of extending the use of key metrics into operations, with 32% of all respondents rating improvements in decision making by operating staff ormanagement as an important benefit of BI. This rating rises to 42% among those who report that mid-level managers or operating personnel (as compared to senior management) are already frequent users of BI.













11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Mid-level managers












1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other




Risk management









3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other












9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%









66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Procurement C-suite



8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%













TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


A director of business intelligence notes, “The real value of what we’re building here is in the ability to combine our data sources.... Then I can speak to a physican or a regional director or our private equity owners” to explain the underlying detail of either positive or negative trends.

Interviewees in the public sector and in the business world alike point out the distinction between raw data and mean-ingful information that supports management decision making. Pittsburgh Mercy has embarked on a process of turning that data into management information, according to Mr. Wolfe: “We have an interdisciplinary team that’s meeting, and our quality director is managing that in terms of working through the process of what is meaningful to see, what things are meaningful to use. We know what’s out there and what we can use, so we’re just trying to organize it in ways that make some sense.”

In this kind of business organization, ensuring that decision makers have complete, accurate, and integrated informa-tion at their fingertips is critical. Roger Clark, the director of business intelligence at 21st Century Oncology, provides another example from the healthcare industry: “The real value of what we’re building here is in the ability to combine our data sources. Then I can speak to a physician [who delivers service] or I can speak to a regional director, which is an operations position, or I can speak to the private equity owners, which is from a financial and operations perspec-tive, and I’ll be able to show them across the company where we have positive or negative trends and be able to explain what the detail behind that is.”

Active users of BI are more likely to rely on key metrics at senior management levels, and they are much more likely to make better use of information tools such as scorecards or performance monitoring.

A metrics-driven organization is not simply one that installs more sophisticated or powerful technology. Rather, becoming metrics-driven starts with instilling a corpo-rate culture that recognizes the value of information and is equipped to employ that information in making sound busi-ness decisions. Ms. Leung at Alliant Credit Union believes the tools themselves can be used in any industry, but the differenceliesinhowthosetoolsareused:“Theonlydistinc-tion [between industries] really is the culture. The tools I’m using can be used in a bank, in a market research firm, in a manufacturing firm, or in an insurance firm. A data ware-house is common—I’ve had data warehouse experience in all differentindustries.So,thetoolsarenotthedistinction.It’sthe culture of how a company uses information that creates the distinction.”

“We have a lot more data than we have information,” says a CFO from the healthcare industry.

The culture at smaller companies may, in fact, not be as conducive to adopting new technology to provide manage-ment information. Nearly half (47%) of respondents from companies with between 500 and 1,000 employees say that the lack of perceived value of or need for BI applications is one of their largest challenges, while only 25% of those from the largest companies (with more than 5,000 employees) say this is a challenge for them.

Perceptions of the business users of information can be a key indicator for the successful adoption of new technology, and interviewees stress that BI applications are only as valu-able as the use to which they are put. As Mr. Gumpert-Hersh at Wescom Credit Union explains, “Business analytics can drive a decision, but they don’t make the decision—people make the decision.” Mr. Gumpert-Hersh believes this is espe-cially true at the smaller, more localized businesses such as Wescom. “At a lot of other, larger national institutions,” he says, “where you’re dealing with tens of millions of accounts, analytics will make the decision”— out of necessity, given the sheervolumeoftransactions—“andstaffbecometheexecu-tors of the decision. But here, we have people making the decisions, and they use the analytics we provide to help them make an intelligent decision.”


Breaking through information silos Giventhescaleandscopeofthedifferentinformationsystemsin use, survey respondents and interviewees alike mention the difficulty of extracting and using consistent data from across disparate information sources. Finance executives in the survey are looking for solutions that can help them manage the large amounts of unconnected data elements and identify the key metrics that are most meaningful or useful for management.

The survey makes clear that companies in many differentindustries continue to struggle with the problem of tying different information systems together. In response to anopen-ended question on the challenges they face in adopting or implementing BI, approximately a fifth of the respondents list some type of difficulty relating explicitly to disparate systems or sources of data. Other challenges that respondents refer to most frequently relate to the poor quality of the data available, the inability to efficiently sort through or aggregate large volumes of raw data, and the difficulty of gaining an enterprise-wide view of key data.

Thedifficultymayliesimplyintheeffortrequiredtogooutand get the data, as a director of finance in the energy industry notes in his survey response: “We have a good amount of useful data, but sometimes it is in too many places to gather efficiently.” Another director of finance from a midsize manu-facturing company complains of the difficulty of “obtaining useful data from various ERP tables.” A CFO from one of the smaller banks represented in the survey writes that his biggest challenge is “information housed on too many differentsystems,”whileavicepresidentoffinanceatalargeeducational services company complains of “too many legacy applications on too many technology platforms.”

Other finance executives, however, see information silos as affectingthequalityandconsistencyofthedataitself.Avicepresident of business planning and IT in the forest products industry writes, “Key financial data is disjointed from the key operating data that is needed to analyze, prepare, and report performance. As a result, two people can gather [the same] informationandcomeupwithdifferentanswers.”

Bill Horton, CFO at the fishing equipment manufacturer Pure Fishing (a subsidiary of Jarden Corporation), points out the same problem: “Today, one individual may look at information oneway,whileanotherindividualinadifferentfunctionmaybe looking at what they believe to be the same data but at the endoftheday,it’ssomethingverydifferent.[ForourBIsolu-tion] we’re looking at speed of information delivery, certainly, but also consistency [of information] is key—instantaneous access, reliable reporting, and consistent reporting of results.”

Mr. Gumpert-Hersh at Wescom Credit Union discusses the importance of ensuring data quality when using BI applica-tions: “Probably the biggest piece that’s overlooked is the cleanliness of your data, its accuracy and completeness. If the data is incomplete, you lose a lot of your capabilities for predictiveanalytics.Andiftheaccuracyisoff,notonlydoesit not provide you the analysis you want; it provides you the wrong conclusion or possibly sends you in the wrong direc-tion, which could be more costly than simply having incom-plete data.” For that reason, explains Mr. Gumpert-Hersh, “Eighty percent of [finance’s] time can be associated, in one way or another, with cleansing the data, assuring complete-ness of the data, or going back and attaining other resources to complete or validate the accuracy of data.”

Overcoming the problem of information silos and mismatched systems is one of the top concerns revealed in our research. As a director of finance writes, “We have a good amount of useful data, but sometimes it is in too many places to gather efficiently.”

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


Overcoming the problem of information silos and mismatched systems is one of the top concerns expressed by participants in this research. Nearly half of respondents to the survey (47%) select the difficulty of integrating BI applications with existing information systems from a list of the largest challenges they face (see Figure 3), and 41% of respondents either disagree or strongly disagree with the statement that their company can readily adapt information systems to changes in the business (see Figure 4, next page).

Forty-one percent of respondents disagree with the statement that their company can readily adapt information systems to changes in the business.













11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Mid-level managers












1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other




Risk management









3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other












9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%









66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Procurement C-suite



8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%














Responses to the survey’s open-ended questions about the challenges of data management reinforce the observation that dealing with organizational and systems complexity is at the forefront of finance executives’ concerns:

• “Too many independent analytical groups within functions/regions preparing their own data and own interpretations.”—Senior vice president at a professional services company

• “Complexity of business—dozens of plants, thousands of customers, thousands of products, multiple end markets, and lack of standardization in business processes.”—CFO at a midsize manufacturer

• “The company revenue is dependent on the operations of schools that are independent entities whose accounting records are separate and each run by their own board of directors. This makes it challenging to collect and process the information needed for decision making.”—Regional finance manager in education













11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Mid-level managers












1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other




Risk management









3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other












9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%









66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Procurement C-suite



8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%














TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S

Finance executives’ views of IT EffectiveuseoftechnologyandoftheITfunctionisassoci-ated with higher levels of satisfaction with companies’ abili-ties to manage data. A small segment of survey respondents (12%) say they are “very satisfied” with the ability of their organization’s IT function to provide accurate and relevant information to support the business case for technology investments. These respondents report that their companies employ a variety of information tools and BI applications more extensively than do others. At these companies, the IT function is also more likely to be involved in preparing the business case for technology investment (61%, compared to only 37% at companies where respondents are “not at all satisfied” with their IT function).

ThedifferingrolesandresponsibilitiesoffinanceandofITcan be a key influence on the selection and implementation of BI solutions. In the majority of companies represented in the survey, either finance or the IT function is responsible for preparing the business case for technology investment (see Figure 5); in 36% of the companies, the two functions have joint responsibility.

The quality of finance’s working relationship with other functions also influences the success of the implementation itself. In a majority (58%) of companies in the survey, IT has either joint or sole responsibility for overseeing the imple-mentation of technology solutions. At the same time, finance has oversight responsibilities in 44% of the companies, and the C-suite in 47% of companies. Clearly, the ability of these separate functions to work well together, especially in cases where they share oversight, will be a factor in the success of the implementation.

The quality of finance’s working relationship with other functions influences the success of the implementation itself.













11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Mid-level managers












1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other




Risk management









3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other












9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%









66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Procurement C-suite



8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%














Two respondents express opposing views of the value of the IT function in driving change. One says he is looking for IT to “bring up new ideas,” while the other simply wants IT to “get out of the way.” Another respondent describes an IT func-tion that falls short of providing value-added support: “We have limited IT support in the plant; our investments are driven by Operations and Finance. We mainly use local IT for hardware-related items and use our Corporate IT for buy-in, technical details, e.g., interfacing with our ERP system and negotiation with software vendors.”

In contrast, other survey respondents highlight what they consider to be the strengths that an effective technology function brings to the table: • “IT can bring how others are using this technology to our organization—best practices. Our managers are not especially tech savvy, and they need IT to show them how to leverage technology.” —CFO from the public sector

• “[ITshould]exploretheoptions,mapthepros/cons,and provide feedback during brainstorming.” —CFO from a healthcare provider

Many of the finance executives in the survey express their conviction that the IT function is most valuable when it works closely with operations and finance to understand business requirements. In her survey responses, Ms. Leung from Alliant Credit Union writes, “The IT function can build a long-term partnership with finance on a strategic and operational level and on a consistent basis. The business case forBI shouldbe a joint effort amongFinance, IT, andthe business partners, not IT alone.” Another respondent recommends that IT “conduct a loss analysis by function to understand the root drivers of time spent today on reporting needs; [then] benchmark our internal results with external findings to understand the size and scope of the opportunity.”

Both in this survey and in interviews, finance executives say that significant change initiatives in technology or systems often are best led by top management (including, in some cases,financemanagement).Asuccessfulchangeeffortmustbe driven by business needs, rather than technical consider-ations. For the IT function to provide the most value, in the words of one survey respondent, they must “think outside the traditional model—help identify solutions to problems rather than the simpler, more common strategy of highlighting concerns with no solutions!”

Another finance executive suggests that IT also be good listeners: “Have a positive attitude and focus on getting things done. Our IT department seeks to hear the pain and solve the problems with technology solutions.”

User-focused change management A CFO from the healthcare industry sums up her frustration with her company’s inability to understand its own informa-tion needs, much less manage them well: “We don’t even know what information to gather or what to do with it if we did have it. The BI industry needs to EDUCATE potential users.” The CFO of a real estate development and property management non-profit discusses the challenges of educating management on the full potential of information integration: “We need to be able to support the managers with information that would be relevant and meaningful to help them make decisions. In the past, perhaps, managers weren’t as aware of the poten-tial for using this data. Slowly we’re starting to change that with some of the analytics that we’re providing, which weren’t available before.”

Developing a good understanding of users’ information needs, and matching technologies to those needs, are prerequisites for successful technology projects. The manager of special proj-ects at a midwestern manufacturer attributes his company’s successful changeover in BI systems to the upfront involve-ment of the system’s business users: “We sat with what we call the ‘power users’ of BI and we kept them informed of what we were doing. We made the changes that they had asked for, the things that they said they’d like to be able to see out of a better system. We were able to give them pretty much what they wanted and give them things that they didn’t have before.”

The consequences of failing to involve the user commu-nity and keep communication flowing can be severe. From his perspective as the president of the Orange County, California, chapter of the Institute of Management Accoun-tants, as well as from his finance experience in the manu-facturing industry, Neal West, says, “One of the biggest roadblocks to successfully implementing BI systems can be lack of involvement by the user community. In my experience, it’s critical to make sure up front that you spend the time to really understand the user requirements, and then make sure those are clearly documented. That way, you know exactly where you are going, and you can hold regular meetings with the implementation team to make sure you stay on time and onbudget.It’simportanttotrytoheadoffanyproblemsveryearly so that you can ensure that the system will be working ondayone.Youcan’taffordtoignoretheuser.”

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


Other finance executives in the survey emphasize the importance of marrying business requirements with tech-nical knowledge. A CFO from the retail industry urges IT to “[gain] a better understanding of the issues that each oper-ating function faces. This provides them [IT] with knowledge andinsighttofindthemosteffectivesolutions.”Similarly,adirector of finance at a consumer products company writes that IT should be “asking the right questions to the business owners about purpose, need, and suitability, ensuring that applications can/will be integrated, and understanding the true cost of ownership and benefits.”

Mr. Wolfe at Pittsburgh Mercy notes, “You can set some direction and start themes, but the real work has to be at the grassroots level. To my mind, involving and empowering people at that level is essential to having a product that is sustainable and that actually becomes a part of the work life of the individual.”

Developing a good understanding of users’ information needs, and matching technologies to those needs, are prerequisites for successful technology projects.

Alliant’s Ms. Leung makes a similar point: “Finance and IT can provide the structure, the infrastructure, the business definition, perhaps even the guideline and the target. But if you build a struc-ture, a system, and a bunch of business rules that are used only by finance and IT, that’s not [a useful] role. The user should not be us [finance or IT]; the main user should be the rest of the organiza-tion. Our role is to provide the road, the map, and the education, so that the rest of the company is able to use the information.”













11%

28%

37%

38%

72%

77%

36%

43%

52%

48%

27%

22%

54%

29%

11%

14%

2%

1%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%



Mid-level managers












1%

6%

8%

8%

12%

14%

16%

24%

32%

35%

36%

41%

51%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other




Risk management









3%

10%

23%

25%

26%

28%

29%

30%

32%

33%

47%

50%

0% 20% 40% 60%

Other












9%

28%

33%

40%

49%

44%

27%

25%

27%

27%

26%

33%

30%

26%

17%

18%

8%

7%

4%

4%

4%

4%

4%

5%

5%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%









66%

55%

46%

25%21%

15%

44%

58%

22%

12%

5%

47%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%


Procurement C-suite



8%

13%

23%

38%

40%

50%

52%

53%

53%

57%

71%

77%

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%














The CFO of a healthcare provider says, “To my mind, involving and empowering people at [the grassroots] level is essential to having a product that is sustainable and that actually becomes a part of the work life of the individual.”

Thesefinanceexecutivesrecognize thatdifferentpeoplewithin the organization will have both different infor-mationneedsanddifferentabilities.Thosewhooverseetechnology investment projects must be able to tailor their work to the needs of the users. As Mr. Wolfe says, “Thebiggestchallengeistheculturalchangeofthestaff.The technology is relatively simple when compared to whatittakestogetpeopletoviewtheworldinadifferentway, particularly in our environment, which has so few managers that have had any real business training.”

In the survey, 77% of finance executives say that demon-strating the benefits of improved analysis and decision making are very important for making the business case for technology investment. (See Figure 6.) Nearly as many (71%) cite ease of use by operations. Technology is just a waste of money if the business users can’t or won’t take advantage of it.

As Ms. Leung asks, “Are you fighting the information, or are you actually embracing the information, under-standing it, looking at your business and making deci-sions?”Shegoesontoexplain,“Youhavedifferentpocketsof people buying into that information. You have pockets where individuals are data-oriented, so they already have in their head what they really want and need. Then when the organization provides that information, they will embrace it and build on it and take it to wherever they think best. But you will have other pockets of people who are not data-oriented, who would require education and a little public relations to help them understand how this information could help them. You have to help them realize the next step.”

Mr. Horton at Pure Fishing says, “The end users are our operating units in almost every function. That’s the way we’re looking at it. What we want to do is take our [spreadsheet-based] corporate scorecard and put that onto an online BI tool, so that we then have the function-ality to be able to drill down into the details. We’ll have much deeper analytics and essentially be able to dive into the specific dataset.”

Several interviewees stress the importance of allowing business users to grow into the full set of capabilities offeredbytechnology.Identifyingandworkingwithleadusers is one way of integrating technology capabilities within an enterprise. Most importantly, says Ms. Leung, “you have to gauge the appetite of your organization for information. If they’re not ready, you have to build for it. Shoving a system down their throat and demanding it be used does not work. You really do have to understand how much they can absorb, and then do it in phases and very carefully. You’re maximizing your return on that invested capital [in that way]. If I take our systems to Phase 100 in this organization, but we’re only ready for Phase 5, it’s not going to work.”

Stephanie Vick, vice president and controller at Virginia Credit Union (VACU), provides an example from her company’s adoption of the BI capabilities it obtained as an add-on when VACU converted its core processing system: “There is a very diverse range of how people like to view their data and what they like to use. You have people who want up-to-the-minute updates on how things are doing, and thatmakes a difference in theirdaily decision making. Some folks clearly are using the data you provide and really want more of it. Certainly for us, I think that the biggest advantage is that it gives those power users or those more technical users the ability to have more control over their reports—to get the data when they want it and not have to make requests to somebody in order to get data.”

Ms. Vick recognizes that adoption of the full scope of BI capabilitieswillrequireaconcertedeffort:“Forthemostpart, we’re using [the BI add-on] mainly as a reporting type mechanism and not as much as a performance management mechanism. As far as moving to that second level, I think there probably needs to be more of acoordinatedeffortacrossdepartments.”

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


Our research suggests some best practices for moving an organization forward. Mr. Horton at Pure Fishing points to the need to supply knowledgeable resources for helping managers navigate through the information available to them: “For every functional group within the company, we have an IT analyst who supports the business. The analyst reports in through IT, but also has a very strong dotted- line reporting relationship to the business function, and they work side-by-side. Just like in finance, we have a FICO analyst to support the FICO components of [our financial system], and they work alongside our accounting and finance organization to make sure that we’re getting everything we need from our systems.”

From our survey, a team leader in the financial services industry recommends “develop[ing] a user-friendly test model that demonstrates the benefit (with some real and quantifiable data) which could/should include time savings measures and meaningful market penetration.” A CFO from a large non-profit also says to “select a pilot group and demon-strate the functionality; then utilize the operating depart-ment as a ‘sales force’ for the organizational objectives.”

The role of finance and IT in technology adoption, says a CFO in the financial services industry, is to “provide the road, the map, and the education, so that the rest of the company is able to use the information.”

Ms. Leung notes that Alliant takes this kind of continuous-improvement approach: “Once you have the [metrics-driven] culture, then you have to pace how fast the culture can adapt to analytics. You can have very simple analytics that can get some very quick wins, and then you have very complex analytics that might be more strategic and require moreofa long-termplanningand forecastingeffort.Onceyou realize the gains and benefits from meeting your basic needs, then you can build to more complex [uses].”

-

Sponsors’ perspectiveFrom the wealth of information and observations provided by this CFO Research Services report, you can see that CFOs have a wide range of opinions and insights as to where, when, and how they either have deployed business intelligence decision support solutions within their businesses, or where they are considering taking that step depending on where they are in their process of evaluation or deployment of the technology.

Since our valued customers span this spectrum, it is very important to provide support and solutions that can address customer needs through this journey, and as a result HP/ Microsoft (and Intel) are pleased to offer a range of exceptional solutions, from a simple “appliance” (easy to procure, deploy, and support) to reference architectures to custom BI solutions built on HP’s converged infrastructure. These are flexible, yet powerful, solutions addressing CFO needs for everything from SQL server data consolidation to data warehousing to busi-ness intelligence decision support. These solutions also enable IT to develop and deploy them quickly and cost-effectively in support of the CFO (and your end-user organization), thereby aiding in accelerating time to business results for improved fore-casting and decision support. As was stated by one director of finance in this report (page 10), “Effective technology can allow you to leverage limited resources: people, capital, time. Accu-rate, timely information can mean speed to market with the right product: a true differentiator.”

A New Portfolio of Solutions

Our goal is to be able to support and address the four key observations contained in this CFO Research report, as outlined below.

Key Point: The success of technology projects hinges on an excellent understanding of users’ information needs and a close match between user requirements and the technology. By leveraging best practices and with experience and focus on addressing customer needs, HP and Microsoft have simplified our solutions and made it even easier to configure the solutions to match user requirements and technology.

On January 19th, 2011, HP and Microsoft announced a port-folio of solutions that deliver immediate value with optimized performance and create the first self-service business intel-ligence and data warehouse appliances specifically designed to improve decision making, enhance communication, and increase efficiency. Jointly designed with integrated hard-ware, software, and support, these new appliances are easier to deploy, operate, and manage than traditional, proprietary offerings, delivering complete business services with ease.

HP Announcement: Press release.

These solutions help organizations optimize employee produc-tivity and decision making, while simplifying the delivery of applications for IT.1 Until now, there have been two ways to deploy critical business applications: highly customized

deployments that take too long, or proprietary stacks of appli-cations and infrastructure that are inherently rigid and slow to change. The result is that only 32% of IT projects that deliver critical business applications are rated as “successful” by the organizations implementing them.2

Key Point: In both the survey and the interviews, finance executives say that the IT function can provide the most value in technology adoption by developing a good under-standing of the business uses for the technology and working closely with other functions to match technology capabilities with business needs.Customers are able to match technology to their business needs and reduce time-to-business-value.

The jointly engineered appliances (for BI, DW, OLTP, and Messaging), along with related consulting and support services, enable IT to deliver critical business applications. In the case of the HP Business Decision Appliance, it can be installed in as little as one hour, compared with potentially months needed for traditional systems.3 One of the solutions already offered by HP and Microsoft—the HP Enterprise Data Warehouse Appliance—delivers up to 200 times faster queries and 10 times the scalability of traditional SQL Server deployments.4

With the HP Business Decision Appliance, HP and Microsoft have greatly reduced the time and effort it takes for IT to configure, deploy, and manage a comprehensive business intelligence solu-tion, compared with traditional business intelligence solutions in which applications, infrastructure, and productivity tools are not pre-integrated. The appliance is optimized for Microsoft SQL Server 2008 and Microsoft SharePoint 2010 and can be installed and configured by IT in less than an hour. It provides users an environment where they can share and refresh user-generated PowerPivot workbooks, and it gives IT insight and oversight into end-user generated content.

Key Point: Finance executives—and, in particular, those at midsize companies—are looking to adopt BI systems that can help them manage a growing body of raw performance data. Customers need solutions that scale and maximize the extraction and translation of data into meaningful information for their businesses.

This capability can transform enormous quantities of data with incredible speed into meaningful information that can be easily shared with others. For the first time, any line of business can easily perform business analytics, combine data sources, and with the interactive “slice and dice” capabilties discover new insights, patterns, and trends from their desktop. By adding collaboration via SharePoint, users can share work and build upon the work of others to collectively make better decisions together.

In the survey, 77% of finance executives say that demonstrating the benefits of improved analysis and decision making are very important for making the business case for technology invest-ment. (See Figure 6.) Nearly as many (71%) cite ease of use by operations. Technology is just a waste of money if the business users can’t or won’t take advantage of it.

-


http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/article_detail.html?compURI=tcm:245-790883&pageTitle=Organizations%20Speed%20Business%20Results%20with%20New%20Appliances%20from%20HP%20and%20Microsoft

TH

E PA

TH

TO

BU

SIN

ESS

INT

ELLI

GEN

CE

APP

LIC

ATIO

NS

FOR

MID

SIZ

E BU

SIN

ESSE

S


To this end, we have jointly designed and delivered solutions that epitomize ease of use for operations and IT to leverage business intelligence decision support through this new portfolio of appliances.

Key Point: Finance executives recommend that midsize companies approach BI as a continuous improvement project, and ideally identify “power” users to take the lead both in developing the business requirements for the technology and in incorporating the technology into the business. Through our recent announcements and especially the HP Business Decision Appliance (“self service” BI appli-ance), we provide simple, affordable solutions for businesses that want to start with providing immediate functionality for their “power users.”

Customer Example: (accelerating time-to-business-benefit)

Red Wing Shoes was a beta customer for this solution.

• They loved the speed of deployment, and after unpacking and rapidly setting up the appliance with a few mouse clicks, they were ready to author their first PowerPivot workbooks. Previously this was a process that would have taken them weeks, but it took only hours in the case of the Business Decision Appliance. Now, their business analysts and their broader user community can use a familiar tool, Microsoft Excel, to create and analyze data in new and unique ways.

• TheywerealsoimpressedattheperformanceoftheBusiness Decision Appliance, which helped them analyze and refresh a 50-million-row data set in minutes using the PowerPivot capability.

This also reinforces another statement made earlier in our report by another firm’s finance executive: For the IT function to provide the most value, in the words of one survey respondent, they must “think outside the traditional model—help identify solutions to problems rather than the simpler, more common strategy of highlighting concerns with no solutions!”

The HP Business Data Warehouse Appliance (for small and midsize businesses)

The HP Business Data Warehouse Appliance, planned avail-ability in June 2011, is a data warehouse solution designed for businesses that have data capacity needs of less than 6 TB and yet delivers enterprise-class functionality with increased simplicity and administrator-free operation.

In the survey, 80% of respondents say their companies employ data warehousing moderately or extensively, and are shifting from traditional static budgeting/forecasting to “dynamic rolling forecasts.”

The HP Business Decision Warehouse is based on the proven technology of Microsoft Fast Track, to provide predictable perfor-mance. We have jointly designed and delivered data warehouse solutions that epitomize ease of use for operations and IT to

leverage as a foundation for sophisticated forecasting and other data warehousing requirements.

This appliance, which complements the HP Enterprise Data Warehouse Appliance (designed for large organizations and optimized for Microsoft SQL Server 2008 R2 Parallel Data Ware-house), was introduced in November 2010. The HP Enterprise Data Warehouse Appliance improves data access with massive scalability and faster queries than traditional SQL Server data-bases. Through interoperability with the Microsoft Business Intelligence Platform, customers can deliver managed business intelligence solutions to everyone in an organization.

For more information on this recent announcement, and on the appliances and reference configurations available, click on the following link: www.hp.com/go/convergedapplicationsolutions/microsoft

Accelerating Business Service Delivery

HP and Microsoft will offer support and consulting services for the converged application appliances to help customers accel-erate business service delivery. The services portfolios include assessment, design, proof of concept, and implementation, as well as ongoing support. The services use HP and Microsoft’s expertise in delivering comprehensive simplified solutions for data management, business intelligence, and data warehousing, as well as messaging.

Click here for the news brief.

HP ProLiant G7 Servers, powered by Intel Xeon 5600 processor series

The HP Decision Appliance is pre-configured and optimized on the HP ProLiant DL360 G7 server, and the new HP Enterprise Data Warehouse Appliance was designed and developed using HP ProLiant DL360 and DL380 G7 servers. These new servers, with Intel 5600 series processors, are bringing a new form of business value to customers for solutions like those referenced herein. Click here for more information on these next generation servers and Intel processors.

Footnotes:1- Based on HP research, this is the first appliances portfolio to optimize employee productivity and reduce IT complexity.2- CHAOS Summary 2009, Jim Johnson, Standish Group, April 20093- Based on HP’s experience with customers using the HP Business Decision Appliance4- SQL Server Parallel Data Warehouse (PDW) has been evaluated by 16 early adopter customers in six different industries. Customers compared PDW with their existing environments and saw typically 40x and up to 200x improvement in query times.5- Messaging and online Collaboration Reviews, Nov 30 2010, eWeek.com

http://www.hp.com/go/convergedapplicationsolutions/microsoft

http://www8.hp.com/us/en/hp-news/article_detail.html?compURI=tcm:245-825441

http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_kits/2010/breakingthegridlock2010/proliant.html

http://www.hp.com/hpinfo/newsroom/press_kits/2010/breakingthegridlock2010/proliant.html

The Path to Business Intelligence Applications for Midsize Businesses is published by CFO Publishing LLC, 51 Sleeper Street, Boston, MA 02210. Please direct inquiries to Jane Coulter at 617-790-3211 or [email protected].

Hewlett-Packard and Intel funded the research and publica-tion of our findings. At CFO Research Services, David Owens directed the research and wrote the report.

CFO Research Services is the sponsored research group within CFO Publishing LLC, which produces CFO magazine, CFO Conferences, and CFO.com.

February 2011

Publication number CFO-PRI-001

Copyright © 2011 CFO Publishing LLC, which is solely responsible for its content. All rights reserved. No part of this report may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form, by any means, without written permission.

the path to business intelligence applications for midsize businesses

Documents