The world of analytics is changing.  Self-Service Analytical tools like Tableau, Qlik, and Power BI are enabling business users to perform reporting and analytics on their own with little to no support from the IT organization. This trend has evolved due to several factors including:

1)    Organizations are flooded with data and IT organizations are not able to keep up
2)    Easier to use Business Intelligence tools make it more efficient for business users to directly create their reports rather than go through IT for a project
3)    IT organizations analytical projects can take several months when a business needs this information in weeks

This trend has caused the efforts of IT Business Intelligence (BI) teams to spending most of their energy gathering, cleaning, and structuring data for the business to perform their own analytics through a self-service model. In special cases, they provide industrial strength reporting that can scale to thousands of users where trusted verified data is needed.  However, they are still being shown the door when it comes to some of the more interesting work.

What can IT BI teams do to stay relevant and valuable to the business? We have several suggestions that relate to embracing self-service analytics as the new reality and transitioning core competencies of the Business Intelligence team away from purely descriptive reporting and moving to diagnostic & predictive analytics.

Let’s explain that last concept before prescribing several solutions. The current state of most analytics is descriptive in nature and helps answer questions of, “what occurred?” Diagnostic and Predictive Analytics help answer the questions of, “Why did it occur?” and sets the stage to answer, “What can I do about it?”  Diagnostic Analytics helps organizations to not only understand what, but also why and what decisions and actions can be taken to solve for the issue. This type of analytics is more valuable to the business and requires competencies that IT BI teams are uniquely qualified to bring from their years of building analytical solutions.

To enable IT Business Intelligence teams to move up the value chain from providing commodity reports to business driving analytics, we recommend adding these four components:

1. Build out a Data Science capability– Data Scientists are starting to appear in analytical groups within companies. However, they are still not pervasive and the function is understaffed. In addition, most groups within a company cannot justify the cost of a full-time data scientist. By adding data scientists to the IT BI organization, you are creating a centralized team that can provide analytics to underserved parts of the organization.  This team is already focused on creating analytical data structures and reports and adding the ability to derive insights from the data is a natural extension.   
2. Make it about the Decision– In your requirements process, add Decision Architecture Methodology as a capability. Most methodologies for capturing analytical requirements focus on the questions asked of the data to surmise the Dimensions and Facts.  While this gives us great descriptive analytics, but it does not move the company along the analytical maturity curve.  A deeper focus on the decisions that the business makes and thereby centering analytical capabilities around helping to enable actionable insights will move the needle.
3. Add Decision Theory to your analytics– If Data Science helps you turn information into actionable insights, Decision Theory helps you structure the decision process to guide a person to the correct choice. Decision Theory, along with Behavioral Economics, is focused on understanding the components of the decision process to explain why we make the choices we do. It provides a systematic way to consider tradeoffs among attributes that helps us make better decisions. Tools such as thresholds, alerts, decision matrixes, and choice architecture should be considered important capabilities to add to your team’s tool chest.
4. Create a Report Certification process– As report proliferation occurs with self-service analytics, creating a standard for the health and validity of a report is going to be important if the analytics are to be consumed by a broader audience and are to be trusted.  For example, you may have one group create a report with key metrics sourced from uncertified data sources. By putting reports from individual departments through a certification process similar to UL labeling on electrical products, broader consumers will know the level of scrutiny that has been put on the report by Data Governance and IT teams and thereby trust the data and metrics contained within it.

As IT Business Intelligence teams look to move up the value chain in the capabilities they offer to their internal customers, adding addition skillsets, methods, and tools will be a necessity. The capabilities outlined are a great fit for a centralized team to own and this transformation in IT BI teams can speak to the value these enhanced capabilities provide to the business.

Andrew Roman Wells is the CEO of Aspirent, a management-consulting firm focused on analytics. Kathy Williams Chiang is VP, Business Insights, at Wunderman Data Management. They are the co-authors of Monetizing Your Data: A Guide to Turning Data into Profit-Driving Strategies and Solutions. For more information, please visit www.monetizingyourdata.com.

It’s no surprise that big data is on the rise in businesses around the world. Companies routinely use big data to analyze common trends in their practice; enabling them to make sophisticated decisions to ensure their businesses prosper. According to Statista, an online statistics, market research and business intelligence portal; companies routinely use data to drive process and cost efficiency; drive strategy; and to monitor and improve financial performance. When used in these ways, data has the ability to save the company a significant amount of money because they are able to spend their money efficiently.

While data does have the ability to improve a company’s performance; companies just aren’t catching up on the trends as fast as one would assume.  Big Data software company, Quoble along with Dimensional Research; recently published an e-book, “An In-Depth Look at Big Data Trends and Challenges”. As the name suggests, the data looks at global data trends in the workplace and the problems that businesses often face.

Among the issues that the research uncovered was, “the realization of value from big data in on-premises environments has lagged expectations, largely due to complexity, cost overruns, steep demands for specialized talent, and need for powerful computing platforms.” While companies may understand the value that big data brings their company; finding qualified candidates and obtaining funds to purchase the computing platforms needed to manage data sets are among the set backs employers are facing today. Nearly 75% of those surveyed sighted a gap between the necessary resources and tools that are available to them. And while 50% of businesses plan to moderately increase their data headcounts in the next year; 83% find it difficult to find the right candidate.  Not only does it take time to find the money to pay for data headcounts; finding the right candidate can often times be complex and time consuming.

The survey found that big data teams’ lack of experience creates a slow progress to get things done. 42% also sight that it is hard to keep up with big data trends and new data sources.  Big Data is constantly expanding. Five years ago machine learning and AI weren’t as mainstream as they are now. BI tools were available but not widely used and companies didn’t have big data teams. In fact their “team” often consisted of one or two data scientists. Big Data’s continuous growth has lead to expansion that many businesses can’t keep up with.

The intention of Quoble’s “An In-Depth Look at Bid Data Trends and Challenges” is  not to solve these problems, but to bring awareness to the issues that companies are facing when it comes to data.  As big data continues to surge, so will an influx of knowledgeable employees and efficient software that will guide the business to succeed in an age where big data is becoming the norm.

To view the full report, go to Quoble’s website and download the free e-book.

Colleagues think of data analysis much in the same way they think about marketing. Which is everyone thinks they are data analysts. With little to no practice they can put together graphs and visualize data at the drop of a hat. When interviewing Dave from accounting he made sure you knew that he has Tableau reader on his desktop which totally means he’s one step away from Tableau certification. Karen from Sales also discussed her extensive knowledge when it came to Excel. Yes, that same Karen who emailed you a month ago and asked how a pivot table worked.

If you’re interested in a career in big data it shouldn’t be daunting, but you should take the time to research and learn the tools and software needed to excel (pun intended) at the job. Data analysis is so much more than filtering data and pretty graphs. It takes someone who is curious and can think analytically to thrive in the job.

In his 2009 book, Now You See it: Simple Visualization Techniques for Quantitative Analysis; author and information technology innovator Stephen Few lists 13 key traits of a data analyst. Among those traits include, self-motivation; open-mindedness; and the ability to spot patterns. An average data analyst can access a data set; scrub the data; and visualize it using one of numerous data visualization platforms available. She then comes to conclusions based on those visualizations and calls it a day. An exceptional data analyst can use that same data set and visualization tools and come to the same conclusions. The difference is that he will ask different questions and hypothesize about why conclusions are what they are. An exceptional data analyst asks why 9 out of 10 dentists prefer Colgate or why Rugby is becoming a more popular youth sport in the United States while lacrosse youth teams are declining.  For them, it isn’t enough that the data shows an increase in Rugby youth teams. They have to know why. Which will ultimately bring them to more questions which will lead to more data sets and more visualizations. In essence, is a data analyst’s job ever really done?

Another factor that separates a mediocre from an excellent analyst is the ability to tell a story. Unless you are speaking to a fellow analyst, chances are spewing out data isn’t going to capture the attention or the comprehension of what the statistics show. In fact, if you go that route, you may be met with a lot of blank stares. It’s important to tailor a narrative to the audience you are speaking to. Crafting a story beforehand makes it easy for your audience to follow and will help you answer any follow up questions that you might receive.

While you may have the skills that make an excellent data analyst, without practice you’ll never truly be outstanding at your job. And with data analysts and scientists being critical to the success of a company, it’s important that you push past mediocrity and aim for excellent. So tomorrow when you go into work remember that not everyone can be an analyst but by methodically thinking, crafting a perfect story from your data sets and asking questions, you’ll be on the road to greatness.

The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), the new state privacy law that took effect in January, has fueled a proposed class action lawsuit against online stationery marketplace Minted. So reports Reuters.

Filed in San Francisco federal court, the lawsuit follows the company’s disclosure in May that a third party accessed customers’ information.

The CCPA applies to many companies conducting business in California and is “gaining traction,” notes a blog post from law firm Mintz.

Read the full article from Reuters. 

U.S. authorities’ decision to resume a long-standing cybersecurity beef with Apple appears to signal a broader battle in Congress.

At a recent press conference, the heads of the Department of Justice and the Federal Bureau of Investigation announced that they had succeeded in unlocking two iPhones without Cupertino’s help. But, as headline writers noticed, Attorney General William Barr and FBI Director Chris Wray mainly used the event to slam the tech company for refusing to give law enforcement a “backdoor” into encrypted devices.

The two iPhones underlying this latest dispute belonged to Mohammed Saeed Alshamrani, the gunman who carried out a terrorist shooting at Pensacola Naval Air Station in December 2019. “Thanks to the great work of the FBI—and no thanks to Apple—we were able to unlock Alshamrani’s phones,” Barr said. As The Verge notes, he also blasted the months and “large sums of tax-payer dollars” involved in the effort.

Apple disputes the claim that it hasn’t helped. As CNBC reports, the company said it handed over “gigabytes of information,” including “iCloud backups, account information and transactional data for multiple accounts.” But, Apple maintained its opposition to unlocking encrypted devices, which became a flashpoint between investigators and the company in 2016 over a shooting in San Bernardino, California.

At the press conference, Barr seemed to hint at what might have been the real purpose of the event: championing a bill in Congress that would force Apple’s hand. “The developments in this case demonstrate the need for a legislative solution,” he said, adding that Americans must make a choice “through their representatives.”

The press conference came as a vote loomed in the House of Representatives for the EARN IT Act, which would vastly expand the federal government’s powers over online platforms and their users. According to TechCrunch, the bill “risks undermining encryption right when a population forced by COVID-19 to do everything online from home can least afford it.”

Federal investigators were ultimately able to access the Pensacola shooter’s phones without a backdoor. “The idea that iPhones are ‘unhackable’ is obsolete,” Johns Hopkins University cryptographer Matthew Green told Wired. “We all need to adjust our expectations accordingly—particularly when governments demand that firms break or weaken their encryption.”

In a key decision, the UK Supreme Court has found that supermarket chain Morrisons was not liable for a data breach carried out by a former internal auditor at the company. So reports Accountancy Daily.

Employment and information law attorney Mark Thomas told the publication that an earlier appeals court decision had held Morrisons “liable for the actions of a rogue employee with a vendetta against the firm.” The Supreme Court’s reversal, Thomas said, has now “restored normality” to British law on what’s known as “vicarious liability.”

The employee, Andrew Skelton, was previously sentenced to eight years in prison in connection with the breach.

Read the full article from Accountancy Daily.

Facebook has announced a $550 million settlement in a 2015 class action lawsuit that claimed the social-media giant’s facial recognition tools violated Illinois state law. So reports Recode.

Facebook had long claimed that the tools, launched in 2010, did not run afoul of Illinois’ Biometrics Information Privacy Act. Enacted in 2008, Illinois’s biometrics privacy law is one of the strictest measures of its kind nationwide.

Facebook has eliminated its photo tag suggestions tool since a federal appeals court denied its request to toss the complaint in August 2019. The U.S. Supreme Court recently rejected another appeal by Facebook. The settlement still awaits a judge’s approval.

Read the full article from Recode. 

A debate has broken out among cybersecurity professionals over the use of the term “black hat” after a Google executive called attention to the issue. Earlier this month, David Kleidermacher, a vice president of engineering at Google in charge of Android security and privacy, announced he was withdrawing from a planned speech at the long-running Black Hat USA conference.

Citing a need for society to adjust how it talks in support of racial justice and equality, Kleidermacher called for changing the familiar information-security terms “black hat” and “white hat.” Beyond race, Kleidermacher also suggested that “man in the middle” attacks should be called “person in the middle” attacks. “These changes remove harmful associations, promote inclusion, and help us break down walls of unconscious bias,” Kleidermacher wrote in a series of tweets. “Not everyone agrees which terms to change, but I feel strongly our language needs to (this one in particular).”

As ZDNet reports, Kleidermacher’s call for more neutral language came as Google, Microsoft, Twitter, LinkedIn, GitHub and others have announced plans to change their technical language in the wake of the Black Lives Matter protests. Terms such as “master,” “slave,” “blacklist” and “whitelist” have been going the way of the fax machine.

A “vast majority” of the information security community reportedly took issue with Kleidermacher’s sense, arguing that the origins of the terms “black hat” and “white hat” relate to cowboy movies rather than race specifically. Kleidermacher wrote that the need for change had “nothing to do” with the terms’ origins. “Those who focus on that are missing the point,” he tweeted. “Black hat / white hat and blacklist / whitelist perpetuate harmful associations of black=bad, white=good.”

As Yahoo reports, hackers worried about racial justice pushed for more opportunities for Black hackers, pointing on Twitter to “huge danger that we waste the moment shuffling words around instead of changing power systems.”

Critics also slammed Kleidermacher’s stance as “performative” and “virtue signaling,” as Infosecurity Magazine reports.

In May, the UK National Cyber Security Center updated its terms, swapping out “blacklist” and “whitelist” for “deny list” and “allow list.”

As many workers have been doing their jobs remotely to try to curb the spread of the coronavirus pandemic, students too have been attempting to do their learning from home.

While cybersecurity watchers have been sounding the alarm for weeks now about the risks of remote work, some are now also calling attention to the unique challenges of e-learning.

Bernie Acre, chief information officer for the city of Bryan, Texas, recommends not having children use a work computer, as KBTX reports. The kids, he reasons, run a bigger risk of potentially infecting the computer by clicking on malicious sites. “Make sure those computers are being used in a public area in the home,” Acre suggests. “Do not let them go into another room and connect to the WiFi because who knows what kids will end up getting themselves into by accident.”

Acre recommends further securing the data on a family’s computers and phones by setting up separate networks for each member, possibly even a guest network. For remote workers or remote students alike, Acre emphasises the importance of keeping software completely up to date to keep out hackers.

Kansas City, Missouri’s school system has ramped up its security precautions, reports EdTech Magazine. Joe Phillips, director of technology for Kansas City Public Schools, says the district has implemented endpoint threat detection on all of its devices, among other network security solutions, to get ready for remote education. The onus, as always, is on employees—teachers and staff—to maintain good cybersecurity practices to safeguard confidential information.

Beyond children, the prevalence of remote cybersecurity training during the COVID-19 health crisis could reshape how workers learn overall, driving a rise in e-learning, reports FedScoop.

“The discussions I’m hearing at the moment are less about the training needs and more about how the entire learning ecosystem could be fundamentally changed,” says Rodney Petersen, director of the National Initiative for Cybersecurity Education. “And cybersecurity could become the pilot for how that is implemented and rethought in this current environment.”

Charges that U.S. officials have leveled at a Russian group calling itself Evil Corp. may drive home the potential rewards of cybercrime.

Federal prosecutors recently unsealed an indictment against two Russian nationals, Maksim Yakubets and Igor Turashev, who are alleged to be running the organization. U.S. authorities are offering a reward of up to $5 million for information that leads to the arrest of the two men, according to a recent BBC article. That amount may be small change compared to the vast sums that law enforcement officials accuse Yakubets and Turashev of stealing from others’ bank accounts using malware: an estimated $70 million, according to an ARS Technica article.

Yet, the lifestyle these men allegedly lead appears to illustrate the incentives for those inclined toward cybercrime—and the challenge that information security professionals face in trying to keep hackers out of their data.

Rob Jones is director of the cyber crime unit at the National Crime Agency in the United Kingdom, which is one of 43 countries in which a total of 300 or more organizations have been affected by Evil Corp.’s theft, according to a recent CNN article. Jones said that Yakubets and Turashev ran with a crew that likes to live large. “We’ve been able to identify an online presence for associates of these individuals... which gives you a very good pen portrait of their behavior and the type of lifestyle they lead, which is cash-rich, fast cars, behaving and acting like very flamboyant and extravagant millionaires,” Jones said.

A news release from the NCA even shows Yakubets flaunting his “customized Lamborghini supercar with a personalised number plate that translates to ‘Thief.’”

As The Washington Post concludes, based on the indictments, “Cybercrime definitely pays. At least in the short term. And for the guys at the top.”

In addition to the criminal indictments, the U.S. Treasury Department also announced new sanctions on the Evil Corp. organization.

The United States may have set a fresh precedent with its recent cyber attack on Iran.

The mounting conflict is the first between two nations with significant cyber-warfare abilities, and as such could have wide impact, reports The Christian Science Monitor. “We are seeing two cyber capable powers actually trading attacks,” Sergio Caltagirone, vice president at cybersecurity firm Drago, told the newspaper. “There is another line that has been crossed here that has not been crossed before.”

U.S. Cyber Command conducted online attacks late last month against an Iranian intelligence group with military connections. The cyber strike may also be “unique” as a response to a physical event, in this case Iranian military activity in the Strait of Hormuz, said Christopher Painter, an Obama administration cyber official. Painter noted that cyber warfare carries the benefit of avoiding deaths.

Citing similar reasons, another cybersecurity expert, Splunk’s Haiyan Song, told CNBC the attack was “game-changing.”

Meanwhile, the top U.S. cybersecurity official cautioned businesses to brace for Iranian retaliation. In a statement, Christopher Krebs, head of the Department of Homeland Security's Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, warned of “a recent rise in malicious cyber activity directed at United States industries and government agencies.”

Ramped-up U.S. cyber incursions could have unintended results, the Science Monitor reports. “Companies in the U.S. would not be very happy about other countries doing things willy-nilly here,” said Painter.

Specifics about the U.S. cyber attacks on Iran were not disclosed, reports Ars Technica. Iran’s telecoms minister claimed U.S. cyber strikes against Iran had been unsuccessful, according to Reuters.

Earlier this year, an Israeli bombing in Gaza reportedly marked a different kind of first: a physical, military retaliation to a cyber attack.