As posted in CW Blog 3.13.12
The sample is growing for the Connected World – INEX Advisors survey. We are sharing interesting early returns as part of our commitment to keep you in the loop on what we are learning.
The survey has two paths based on how respondents declare their positions with respect to connected device solutions: user/ deployer of technology, or technology vendor/ service provider. In other words: buyers or sellers. Based on how survey takers respond to that first question, they are taken down one of two paths of questions optimized for their respective community.
However, we have a number of common questions that are asked of both communities. In some cases, the picture that is emerging from those answers is interesting—for the differences and the similarities. Again, we are early in our process, so, anything could change, but, we think we have an example worth sharing.
In our current survey of the connected device solutions market, both communities are asked to rate the impact of connected device solution investment on deployers’ access to and effective application of information—their ‘information effectiveness’. The survey asks for ratings for each of five potential impacts (from the survey, listed in the table below).
Preliminary survey results reveal that there might be a material difference in the perceived impact of connected devices solutions on informational effectiveness.
Key Impacts to Information Effectiveness from Investment in Connected Devices
Obviously, this graphic is presented to show differences between the communities.
User gives ‘realtime access to existing data sources’ as the highest rated/ most powerful impact, whereas suppliers cite ‘new information serving as a critical decision support tool.’
Is it possible that suppliers are marketing and selling ‘new data’ to be used as a powerful decision support tool, while users and deployers are expecting the solutions to gain them realtime, remote or broader access to existing data sources?
Is it a semantics issue? Now that would be rich. A semantic issue in a market that is in many ways a hallmark of the buildout of Web 2.0 and emergence of Web 3.0 – the Semantic Web.
As we stated earlier, we are early in our process, but, eager to share what we are learning as soon as possible. If the trending holds, then we will have found data that helps to define a critical requirement for every stakeholder group to pay closer attention to: Absolute clarity on the information required to address business needs, including identification of existing sources of value-added data before the creation of new data streams.
Our advice: When it comes to data definition, assume nothing. Suppliers, deployers, and their intermediary partners must invest time early and often to ensure that their ontology, schema, architecture—their data definitions and definitions of data—are in absolute alignment.
We need your help to make this survey as valuable as possible. Please invest 10 minutes to share your ideas. Please tell your friends in the user/deployer/evaluator communities that we need them to tell their stories!
Take the survey. Access the results. Make better decisions.