18 September 2009
I'm working as a program management consultant in a governmental agency's Office of the CIO, and have been since early Aug 2009. Unfortunately, I'm not immersed in an organization of optimal maturity with respect to any maturity model. That being the case, I still foresee opportunities to proffer the ideas of LifeGraphs to the federal agency next year. The business case to fund the LifeGraph pilot, which will be developmental is cost avoidance with respect to data integrity, information integration and institutional intelligence.
In the short six weeks I've been consulting at the client site, I've seen spreadsheet after spreadsheet, powerpoint slide after slide, and word document after document where the data element and values are not referenced, no footnotes or endnotes, nada. With the LifeGraph pilot, data integrity will be conspicuous in every instance of data values under the cover of the many document variants for ad hoc workflows.
I haven't seen a single behavior pattern in writing since I've been there but I've asked about them. While I'm amazed at this situation (I haven't visited the right person or I don't know how to ask my question correctly), I'm confident the use of behavior patterns will lead to information integration and not just data correlation or integration. And when these patterns become near effortless to produce from LifeGraphs, the workers will consider them essential tools for decision making.
The idea of institutional intelligence is a bit of a stretch on words so collective intelligence might be more accurate. This organization's collective intelligence will be founded on individuals interpretation of 3D animations of structural patterns that reveal resources relationships, interfaces and inertia, and behavior patterns of the effects from employing resources. There are user friendly tools today to tap the collective and I want to merge the LifeGraph data structure into the statistical nature of collective intelligence.