Doug Theis Leave your comfort zone.

Just 27% of survey respondents rate their satisfaction level for their organization’s current data capabilities as “high.”

In assessing big data capabilities, only a minority of CIOs and other tech and business leaders give their organizations high marks, according to a recent survey from Snowflake Computing. The report, titled “Overcoming the Reality Gap of Big Data,” reveals that data must get to analysts faster. In addition, survey respondents indicate that they’d like to simplify their data pipeline, while bringing down the cost of deploying, managing and tuning data tools. Those solutions could use some updating: While most survey respondents consider themselves firmly planted in the digital age, the vast majority of organizations still cling to “old school” tools—such as spreadsheets—to perform analytics tasks. “The rush to take advantage of new data capabilities has been likened to a 21st century gold rush,” according to the report. “According to some reports, investment in analytics is outpacing other IT areas.

More of the CIO Insight post from Dennis McCafferty

Resilience is very much a hot topic in the business continuity profession, but there seems to be very little agreement about what we mean by resilience; where it sits in relation to business continuity management; and what its scope should be. This article aims at bringing some clarity and will explore the following questions:

What exactly, is resilience and do we share a meaningful definition, or is it just hype?
Does it have enough value or substance to differentiate it from what we already have?
How much resilience do we need or is it OK to be vague about it?
Where does resilience naturally sit within the organization? Does it make a difference?
What does a resilience programme look like and where should we look for guidance?
In 2014, the British Standards Institution (BSI) published BS 65000 ‘Guidance on Organizational Resilience’. In its wake, waves of business continuity managers have been transformed into resilience managers, following the trend or perhaps pre-empting the arrival of ISO’s 22316 resilience offering, due in April 2017. But have things really changed or did resilience just become fashionable? Are we seeing a re-branding, a seized opportunity to balance-off rarely needed business continuity with more general defences that regularly add material value, or is it inevitable evolution?

In its introduction to BS 65000 BSI states that resilience is “…a strategic objective intended to help an organization survive and prosper …the ability to anticipate, prepare, respond and adapt… to minor everyday events to acute shocks and chronic or incremental change”. There is of course much more in the document and the introduction alone runs to four paragraphs, but at first reading are you convinced? Try the following test:

More of the Continuity Central post from John Robinson

The challenges of migrating to a digital business and IT framework are daunting. Today’s fast-moving environment requires new information technology systems, different thinking and entirely new skills. A recently released report from Dimension Data and the Business Performance Innovation (BPI) Network, “Crossing the Transformation Divide: What Frontline IT Workers Need to Make the Leap,” indicates that organizations are largely falling short of the desired mark, and many are close to failing, according to IT workers. Of course, all of this is significant news because IT transformation is increasingly a critical factor in determining whether organizations reach key business goals and achieve a competitive advantage. – See more at: http://www.baselinemag.com/it-management/slideshows/why-are-companies-it-transformations-lagging.html#sthash.8ny1P6q1.dpuf

More of the Baseline slide show from Samuel Greengard

Many of you have been asking when I would start publishing a data center newsletter again. The answer is now! The Expedient Data Center News Digest is a monthly email newsletter about colocation, cloud computing, disaster recovery and CIO strategy. Click here to subscribe and have a look.

The key to attaining running a lean and agile enterprise technology infrastructure is embracing enterprise architecture. However, many organizations still relegate EA teams to peripheral roles while they spend countless dollars, euros, pounds or rupees cobbling together creaky IT infrastructures — budget sinkholes that just barely deliver.

EAs don’t yet have enough leverage in today’s enterprises. A thread that weaves its way through many of Bossert and Laartz’s ideas is that many organizations may have enterprise architects and EA teams, but don’t provide these people the leverage to influence overall IT strategy. If anything, EA tends to remain a “siloed” activity — even though their roles are to tear down the silos. “Companies should give EA departments more responsibility for certain big-picture decisions — for instance, approving new IT-related projects or changes to the technology landscape,” they point out. To overcome organizational inertia, EA proponents need to identify executives or professionals who can step up to leadership roles and challenge the business to develop a greater vision and cohesion for its information technology strategy.

EA needs to reflect the business. Another theme running thro

More of the ZDNet post from Joe McKendrick

It’s easy for leaders to fall into the trap of thinking they need to have the answer to every problem or situation that arises. After all, that’s in a leader’s job description, right? Solve problems, make decisions, have answers…that’s what we do! Why listen to others when you already know everything?

Good leaders know they don’t have all the answers. They spend time listening to the ideas, feedback, and thoughts of their people, and they incorporate that information into the decisions and plans they make. When a person feels listened to, it builds trust, loyalty, and commitment in the relationship. Here are some tips for building trust by improving the way you listen in conversations:

Don’t interrupt – It’s rude and disrespectful to the person you’re speaking with and it conveys the attitude, whether you mean it or not, that what you have to say is more important than what he or she is saying.

More of the LeadingWithTrust.com post from Randy Conly