New Blog Name?

As reported by Mark Goloboy here ”Data Quality” is becoming a dirty word. ”Information Quality” is in vogue.

Maybe I will soon have to change the name of my blog?

Also one may expect other related terms will be changed, like:

  • Data Governance becomes Information Governance
  • Master Data Management becomes Master Information Management
  • Data Matching becomes Information Matching
  • Data Warehouse becomes Information Warehouse
  • Database becomes Informationbase
  • Information Technology becomes Data Technology

But changing the name of a blog is a serious thing you shouldn’t do too often. I think I will wait and see if the term renaming stops at simply replacing data and information. Some guesses for further renaming:

Information Fitness replaces Data Quality as Data quality is often defined as “fit for intended purpose of use” and by replacing data with information that trail is even more clear – opposed to the other trail being real world alignment.

Information Political Correctness replaces Data Governance as Data Governance is a lot about policies and the Data Governance practice is a lot about maneuvering in the corporate political landscape.    

Master Information Technology (MIT) replaces Master Data Management (MDM)

Bookmark and Share

11 thoughts on “New Blog Name?

  1. Dylan Jones 16th July 2010 / 06:51

    Globally, according to Google, over 3 times as many people are searching for the term “data quality” as they are “information quality”, that’s not to mention all the other variations of those keywords, eg. data quality management etc., it will be much higher when you take the variations into account.

    I suspect a vast proportion of these people are every day knowledge workers, managers, executives – all looking for information on how to solve problems, build careers, buy products, connect with others and make decisions.

    Let’s not confuse these folks even further, I think you’re safe with the current title for now Henrik.

  2. Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen 16th July 2010 / 07:03

    Thanks Dylan. I guess you’ll stay put on Data Quality Pro as well 🙂

  3. John Owens 16th July 2010 / 07:10

    Hi Henrik

    If people are claiming that “Data Quality” is becoming a dirty word or term then they must give the reasons why.

    I would say that one possible reason might be that the majority of the efforts are perceived (perhaps incorrectly) as concentrating on sorting out a mess as opposed to preventing the mess happening.

    Changing the name of the activity without changing the nature of the activity will not make it “clean”.

    There are many places in which “information” is a more appropriate term than “data” but I would suggest that this is not one of them. Information is merely data in context, so, without quality data (i.e. fitness for purpose) you cannot have quality information.

    Quality data gives quality information.

    So, Henrik, I would stick with your blog name for now. It might not be following the latest “fashion” but it is a quality name in that it accurately defines what the blog is about and correctly names the activity.

    Regards
    John

    • Bladimir Rondon 20th July 2010 / 22:03

      I agree.
      Data are the Brick to build Quality Information Walls.
      Keep doing Data Quality!! 😉

      BR

  4. Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen 16th July 2010 / 07:41

    Thanks John. Also my stance has actually been like Mark also says in his post, that while I recognize it’s about information: I do “Data Quality” work.

  5. Jim Harris 16th July 2010 / 14:19

    I definitely can’t rename my blog to Obsessive-Compulsive Information Quality because OCIQ would sound like I was obsessive-compulsive about my intelligence quotient.

    And then instead of blogging about how perfect data quality is impossible, I would have to start blogging about how genius level intelligence is impossible.

    Although I guess that would make it easier to convince executives why they don’t invest in IQ–they must have below average intelligence 🙂

    While we’re at, let’s rename quality to trust–therefore Information Trust replaces Data Quality, and we can let everyone know that, in fact, data quality is an IT issue after all!

  6. Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen 16th July 2010 / 15:24

    Thanks Jim, trust me, IQ at a genius level is possible. Didn’t I just hear my wife suggest a jug of sangria in the sun?

  7. Stray__Cat 16th July 2010 / 15:33

    I have somewhere a slide that I use, sometimes, to explain business intelligence to uninformed entrepreneurs that shows a cycle like this:

    Data -> Information -> Knowledge -> ACTION -> Results -> Data

    So, the evolution could be:

    Data Quality -> Information Quality -> Knowledge Quality -> Action Quality -> Results Quality -> Data Quality.

    Given that beginning and end are the same place, I’d not bother too much and have a beer. :o)

    Cheers!

  8. Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen 16th July 2010 / 15:54

    Thanks Augusto. Agree about the loop. Cheers.

  9. Crysta Anderson 20th July 2010 / 19:08

    Besides, “information” has 7 more characters than “data” – that’s just not Twitter-friendly 🙂

  10. Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen 20th July 2010 / 21:51

    Game, set, match: Crysta

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s