35 Years of Business Intelligence Research: Gaps and Needs in Exploratory Methods

Business Intelligence (BI) is becoming increasingly important aspect of navigating complex environmental factors that impact and influence strategic outcomes. While business intelligence often is based on understanding and finding solutions to specific problems through the practical application of the scientific method. Analysts must understand how to mine, collect analyze, understanding and put to good use information in a way that furthers the strategic objectives of an organization (business and/or government). By reviewing current literature on business intelligence one can make an assessment of the gaps in BI methodologies and their limitations on understanding and solving unique problems. 

Sometimes we become accustomed to certain methods of investigating, understanding and interpreting data and that can lead to costly miscalculations that can cost your business money. Many companies rely on premade software that is great for understanding large amounts of data but might not actually solve a complex problem that hasn't been fully defined. We will want to make sure that the methodology is valid and appropriate to the specific problem at hand. To solve unique complex problems means we must sometimes change the assumptions of research to move into uncharted territory where researchers may not have explored in the past (Think if cutting edge fields and unique problems of applicability of research.). While preexisting methods (i.e. such as shelf software) can provide insights into well known problems such methods should be secondary to understanding essential research question as defined by the problems a company is currently facing.

A metanalysis in the journal Management Research Review focused on 120 articles spanning 35 years of research on BI intelligence (Talaou & Kohtamäki, 2020). The authors found that more scrutiny of the gaps between BI process, antecedents and outcomes could help further the BI field.  Likewise, they also found eight dimensions where these patterns and contradictions occurred such as environmental, organizational, managerial-individual antecedents, BI process; strategic outcomes; firm performance outcomes; decision-making; and organizational intelligence.

The authors leave us with the conclusion that business intelligence (like other types of intelligence) are stuck within certain modes of thinking and won't open their practices to new ways of collecting and analyzing intelligence data. Intelligence managers don't like to have their intelligence practices reviewed even when they have been shown to be ineffective and not based in appropriate methodology or strong construct validity (i.e. Lack of measurable methods that actually reflect the behaviors/phenomenon.). They indicate that opening business intelligence practices to outside reviews by scientists/scholars might help improve those methods. 

Complex problems abound in business and those that can master these problems are more likely to succeed and flourish then those that don't. Cutting edge industries must rely on research and development to innovate and grow in a complex world where factors often change by the day. More research leads to more knowledge but only when the initial problems are well defined. Exploratory research helps define those issues and potential methods so that quantitative research can better justify cause and effect relationships for environmental mastery through problem solving.

Talaou, Y & Kohtamäki, M. (Sept. 2020). 35 years of research on business intelligence process: a synthesis of a fragmented literature. Management Research Review, 44 (5). Retrieved March 13th, 2022 from https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/MRR-07-2020-0386/full/pdf?title=35-years-of-research-on-business-intelligence-process-a-synthesis-of-a-fragmented-literature