Does Big Data have an image problem?

It’s the buzzword of the moment. There are conferences dedicated to it. Big data enthusiasts passionately believe it’s the way forward. And I’m sure that in certain contexts, it may well be. But like any abstract concept, therein lies the rub. I’m pretty sure that 50% of the time spent talking about Big Data is a waste of time. But just like John Wanamaker all those years ago, no one is sure which 50%.

It’s a common problem as the mathematically driven computer brains of Silicon Valley continue to innovate and develop technology at a pace few of us can understand let alone keep up with. Should my company be on Facebook/Twitter/Zolo*? It depends. Should we be doing social media listening? Well yes, obviously, but what to? And so for Big data. Yes, we get why making data available to developers is a “good thing” but which data, when and more importantly, which data is best kept to ourselves?

The problem with big data? It’s in the name. It’s too big and unspecific. Like Government 3.0 and EGovernment, its a broad concept that has worth and value but ultimately lacks a purpose.

Change only comes from people identifying a problem and then exploring solutions to that problem. Some may well involve use of big data. In efficiency terms, anything good that comes from starting with a quizzical look at Big Data is akin to a needle emerging from a haystack.

And the odds on that are less than 50%.

*Zolo doesn’t exist. Or does it?