In trying to cope with the challenges of Big Data, are we missing the fact that some data feeds just aren't worth integrating?

Moreover, isn't focusing on "quite Big Data," identifying the sources that matter, and using thin marketing budgets wisely much more important?

Organizations are in the process of identifying which sources of data, mainly digital, are most useful to them in providing the insight required to drive ROI. There are three main groups that are separated by their ability to handle the complexity of data available to them.

Very few companies are true integrators of systems, processes, content, and message. The majority are struggling with the complexity of the systems and skills required to use digital marketing.

Some companies are still uncommitted to this investment and at the experimentation stage, in which true benefit will not be derived due to lack of general integration and effort.

Some organizations have undergone large-scale multiyear data management initiatives to improve integration, only to find that the diversity, incompleteness, and rate of change in marketing data sources greatly diminished many intended benefits.

However, not all data integrations are beneficial. Some are not worth the investment required. So, the question for us as database experts is this: Which sources are worth having, and can that be proven?

What to Ask

Sign up for free to read the full article.

Take the first step (it's free).

Already a registered user? Sign in now.

Loading...

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
image of Simon Oliver

Simon Oliver is managing director of Uncommon Knowledge.

LinkedIn: Simon Oliver

Twitter: @Data_Wizardy