About

Welcome to The Analytics Ecology

As TheFutureOf is dead, I'll be posting here what I was going to post there. My hope is that The Analytics Ecology will be what I desired of TheFutureOf, an online discussion, a true Meeting of Minds or Glorious Accident, where people with different backgrounds and lots of knowledge and a willingness to share could get together and butt heads in a caring and considerate manner. I don't want arguments, I want conversations. I want people willing to grow and learn, not people stuck in their own ideologies and experiential moraines. In the very least, people who recognize that their mountaintop might be merely a leaping point for others to explore greater and more glorious things.

My desire with The Analytics Ecology blog is to focus on where the analytics and all feeder fields are and where they're going, not just NextStageisms or Evolution Technologyisms. I don't want this blog to focus discussions on any one tool or tool set, or for that matter on any one discipline or cache of disciplines. I've never found such limited exchanges very useful.

I would prefer this blog be a place for several voices to focus on the needs of the many, especially on where things are going or where they need to go. I will post about NextStage tools, research, etc., and only when I believe doing so will answer questions and such.

My desire is that this blog become an open discussion about how different tools serve the greater analytics ecology. What is their place? What purpose do they serve? Do they play well with others?

For example, let me share some conversation summations that caused me to create this blog:

  • Explain why something is better.
    Because it is easier to use.
    That only makes it more accessible, not necessarily more accurate and accessibility doesn't equate to accuracy.
  • Does standardization make something a science?
    No – standardization only means more people agree than disagree on what something is.
  • You've said you don't like the amount of space being devoted to a screen element. Please explain the “why”. Why don't you like it?
    I just don't like it.
    That's fine, but what is the audience? Are you the audience? Can you detail why it will/won't work? What is that screen element's purpose in the overall gestalt of the presentation?

Conversations such as these (there've been several) have led me to develop a guideline for tools NextStage (and I offer these guidelines freely to others) develops for public use:

End-User Tool Laws:

  • An end-user tool should have a minimum of functionality
  • An end-user tool should be extremely easy (ie, psychonomically intuitive or “requires no training” based on a given cultural paradigm although proper use may require a cultural shift) to use (“Do this here” is a good example of a simple tool's use)
  • An end-user tool should result in an immediately successful experience for the tool user
  • An end-user tool must never ever ever run through the end-user's resources (mustn't run through batteries, resource depletion)
  • An end-user tool must provide more detail/explanation only when specifically asked.

The basic premise in the above is that a tool is not a solution. A tool is a means to a solution.

Anyway, I'd love to hear from people interested in blogging here and definitely hope people comment on the posts.

Let's see what happens.

And thanks,
Joseph

One thought on “About

  1. […] The above is a wonderful demonstration of problem solving within an existing paradigm. Remember “An end-user tool should be extremely easy (ie, psychonomically intuitive or “requires no training” based on a given cultural paradigm) to use” from our End User Tool Laws? […]

Comments are closed.