The main idea that is advocated for in the article “Competing on Analytics” is that analytics is the most effective means of competition in the market (Davenport 98). Among the analytic tools to employ, the author enlists improved data collection led by common leadership to make sure there is no technological discrepancies. Also, analytics should serve a common purpose, e.g., improving customer response and decreasing the churn. Furthermore, the author states the necessity to adopt a common culture that promotes decision-making based on solid evidence, recruit specialists with profound analytic skills, and keep in pace with technology in the field. Integrated analytical strategies and top-quality quantitative tools will empower the employees and enhance the decision-making process.
The all-encompassing problem discussed in the article is that embracing analytical strategies requires time, resources, and expense. The author mentions that it takes several years to see the difference once a company has adopted such strategies.
The adoption of analytics also requires transformation on every organizational level: HR, technology, monitoring and maintenance. The expenditures related to setting up the technology might also come as an unpleasant surprise: transaction data systems, analytic software, and, correspondingly, software should be selected, implemented, and refined. Finally, switching to analytic strategies will require certain personnel and, possibly, leadership turnover. Subsequently, training programs for the existing personnel are to be developed, which means further expenses (Davenport 106-107).
Much of the problems that arise in the process of analytics adoption can be compensated for by hiring the best and most prominent specialists that might prove a valuable asset considering the company’s business model. Considering that, in the first years of the transformation, many changes will take place, the organization must function as an integrated whole.
For that sake, the most optimal solution would be hiring a qualified person, an expert in mathematics, statistics, and data, which is at the same time capable of explaining and conveying their message using business talk. Such people should be plentiful, if possible, to cooperatively reduce the time and cost of analytics adoption (Davenport 107).
The main motive of the author’s recommendations is that nothing should be left behind. For instance, to become a strong competitor, it is recommended that organizations invest in extensive analysis of market and HR data rather than focusing solely on their core capacity.
The importance of analytics should be not only acknowledged but also prioritized, developed, and maintained on all levels of the enterprise. The analyzed data should not only be stored but also shared with the clients and suppliers. In turn, data storage should not be regarded as a goal; the data can be moved around and experimented with in order to adopt the most efficient model of information generation (Davenport 107).
Among the lessons that can be learned from the given article is the importance of analytics as a competitive strategy that subsequently shapes other strategies, as exemplified by some companies that mastered acquiring and exploiting data. Analytics can serve as a means of converting knowledge into know-how to assess customer behavior patterns and predict causality at that. The incorporation and implementation of analytics into business model can be complicated as it requires time and resources. On the other hand, with the right people, technology, and culture, companies deploying analytics for their business purposes are the most likely ones to succeed in becoming powerful competitors in their markets.
Works Cited
Davenport, Thomas H. “Competing on Analytics.” Harvard Business Review 83.1 (2006): 98-107. Print.