Manage Your Informationas a Product

Richard Y.Wang -Yang W. Lee - Leo L Pipino • Diane M.Strong

Companies must

understand their

customers' needs,

appoint a manag-

er to oversee tbe

production of

bigh-qtiality

information, and

recognize that

information is

not Just a by-

product.

Richard Wang is codirector for

the Total Dala Qjality

Management Program, MIT

Sloan School ot Management,

and associate professor,

School of Management, Boiiton

University. Yang Lee is assis-

tant professor. College of

Business Administration,

Northeastern tJniveFsity. l e ]

Pipino is associate piofess)r,

College ot Management,

University ot Massactijsetis at

Lowell. Diane Strong is assis-

tant protessor. Department ot

Management, Worcester

Polytechnic Institute.

Many inanagers bc'lic\c lliai c|iiality infor-mation is key lo ihcir suctcs.s. Do they acton that heliefr' Not convincingly. Mostsenior executives liave experienced ihccosts of decisions based on poor intbrma-tion. Most general managers have tleallwith the frustration of knowing that theyhave data within the firm bm tliey cannotaccess ii in ihe integrated form needed.'Most chief information officers have facedthe discomfort of exf'jiaining why, in lightof ihe company's costly invesmicnts in IT,the tlata are of poor (|uality or inaccessi-ble. Firms recognize the need for qualityinformation and many strive to satisfy it.All too often, however, the results are dis-appointing.

During ihe past decade, we have investi-gated the information quality problemsthat organizations encountered. Whatclearly stands out from our researcli is theneed for companies to treat informationas a product. Often, however, companiestreat intbrmation as a by-product; theyfocus on the systems or the events thatproduce the information instead of theinformation content. To treat informationas a product, a company must follow fourprinciples;

1. Understand consumers' informationneeds.2. Manage information as the product ot awell-defined production process.

95

Sloan Managemenl ReviewSummei 1998

Wang • Lee • Pipine • Strong

3. Manage information as a prcxiiici with a lift- cycle.4. Appoint an information producl managt-r (IPM) lomanage ihe informatit)n processes and resulting prod-uct.

We call the application of these principles ihe infor-mation product (IP) approach. It is the keystone onwhitli ihf deliveiy of high-(.[Lialiiy information de-pends. In this article, we argue for adoption of the IPapproach and provide a framework for its implemen-tation. We use four cases, drawn from our fieldresearch experiences, io illustrate the IP approach'sprinciples and the negative (.-onsetiuenees that re.siiltwithout them.

Introducing the CasesFinancial Company i.s a leading in\'e.-^tnient bank williexten,si\e domestic and international operations. Ii.scustomers needed to trade inimediateiy after openinga new account. The new account had to be linked toother accounts that the customer may have (opened,and the information in all accounts had to be accii-rale. up to date, and con.sistent. The hank recjuiredreal-time account hakinee information to enforee min-imum aecoLint balance rules across a eiLstomer's mul-tiple accounts. Failure to obtain thai intbrmalionexposed the bank to potentially large monetary loss-es. By statute, the bank had to elose all of a cus-tomer's aeeounts when informed hy federal authori-ties of criminal activities by that customer. Adheringto the statute required timely, integrated information.

Financial Company and Eyewear

Company had to determine the needs

of two types of consumer: the external

customer and the internal information

consumer.

pro\'idecl to the grinders al the lahoraiorie.s. Tf thegrinder's inlorinaticjn needs were not met, the pro-ckietion of lenses was negatively affected.

Chemical Company, a Fotiune 500 company, is amajor presence in the petrochemical industry'. Foreach chemical product. Chemical Company was legal-ly required lo produce a material safety data sheet(MSnS) that identified the product's potential hazards,the symptoms of the hazard, and the actions to takeshoultl a symptom be observed. Because of the highproduct liability co.st.s of not reporting potential haz-ards, the company hat! every- incentive to jirovicleaccurate, complete, timely, and LintlerstandahleMSDSs. Chemical Company had a well-definedproce.ss ft)r creating MSDSs. When a new chemicalwa.s developed, the MSDS group contaetetl exjierlswho contributed to the specification.

Data Company captures data from hundreds of mil-lions of transactions a week generated hy tens ofthoLi.sancis of retail stores. C lienls purc-hased informa-tion that v\'as refined from ihe raw data collectedIroiii these retail stores. Data Company had built suf-fieient intelligence into it.s systems to provide high-C]uality information. It hati iieen using neural net-works for se\'eral years anti hatl built an liniiulationproeess thai estimateti any nii.s.sing data. For example,the system enabled the com[")ain' to correct data thatwere corrupietl by faileti or bat! transmissions.

Overlooking the Four PrinciplesThe experiences of these companies suggest the neg-ative consequences that companies face if they over-look the four principles of ihe IP approach.

Failure to Understand Consumers' NeedsFinancial Coiupany and Flyewear Cotnpany liad tt)tieterinine the needs of two type.s of consumer: theexternal ciisionier antl the iniernal information con-sumer. F.ach company provides an example of whatcan happen when a liusine.ss fails to imderstantitht)se needs.

F.yewear Company sells eyewear products at it.snationwide retail outlets. The retail outlets generatedspecificatit")ns for the eyeglass products and forwartl-ed them lo len.s grinders at one of four laboratories.The laboratories receivetl 2S,0()() eyeglass orders eachweek. The ahility to protiuce eyeglasses that met con-sumer needs depended on the quality of information

For its external customers. Financial Company mustopen new acet)unts cjuickly, maintain up-to-date cus-tomer risk profiles, and know all the accounts relatedto a [•>arti<.i.ilar customer, hiappropriately risky inve.st-menls woultl cause high customer di.ssatisfaction andptnential indemnification to cu.sttjmers for itjsses. Forits internal consumers. Financial Company must pro-

Wang • Lee • Pipino • Strang Sloan Managemenl ReviewSummer 199S

vide reai-time information about any change.s in cus-tomers' account biilance.s. Nol doing so causes differ-L-nl intL'rnal customers lo use locally maintained data-bases that often nvi- inconsistent.

At Financial Company, changes in the

operating environment called for updat-

ed production processes to improve the

bank's informcition products.

Salisfyin>> the neetls of" Eyev 'eur's external customerstranslatetl into providing the proper ten.se.s. v -'hichdependetl on the "elail outlet sending the c-orrect lenssjx'cificutions to the laboniiory. When ihe ojiticians.the writers of the specifications, misunderstood theInformation needs of the lens grinders (the internalcustomer), the res^ilt \^a^ that many lenses needetl tobe reworked. Regrinding lenses led to additionalcosts and to delays that lowered external CListomersatisfaction.

Poorly-Defined Information Production ProcessI-'inancial C'oinpany inaintainei-l a cenuallzed tiistomeraccount tlalaba.se. H\'er\' night it posted transactionsthat occurred throughout the day to the database andupdated customer account balances. Other customerinformation, such as the customers risk profile, how-ever, was updatet on an ad hoc basis when conve-nient. This ad luK approach resulted trom ireatinginformation .solely as the by-product ol' a physicalevent rather than us the product of a well-definedproduction pi()ce?.s. A change would be triggered by,say, a customer rec]ue.st. A well-defined productionprocess, in this ct'ntext, would rec[uire systematicexamination of customer behavior and the attendantupdate ot the risk profile.

Financial Company's internal customers viewed cus-tomer account information as unreliable. As one vicepresideni joked, "F-Aet 'one but the cotisultant hasu|")date privilege io customer account information."Hoping to solve tliese problems, individual depart-ments developed home-grown customer accountdataba.ses. The re-;ult was a proliferation of local cus-tomer databases with inconsistencies among them.These local tlatabases were tailored to the needs oSeach department .md contained more current infor-

mation on the departtnent's customers than did thecentral database. Kach department collected andprocessed information as a by-product of its localoperations, indepentlent ofthe bank's need for inte-grated customer account inlortnation.

No Product Life CycleIn adapting the classical marketing notion, we definethe information product life cycle as the stagesthrough which information passes from introduction!o obsolescence." The life cycle can be t_h\ided intofour stages: introduction (creation), growth, maturity,and decline. Chemical Company is an example of anorgLinization thiit chd not (ollow this principle. Itswell-defined [irocess for creating MSDSs thd notextend to maintaining the quality of the informationover the life cycle ofthe protluct. As a result, infor-mation on new hazards, based on accumulated expe-riences with the ]irodu(.t and iMnerging scientific evi-dence, was incoiporated into a jiroduct's MSDS errati-cally. Over time, information quality deteriorated.

At I'inancial ("onipany, changes in the operating envi-ronment called for ujxlatct! production processes toimprove the bank's information products. FinancialCompany, however, clitl not manage the lite cycle ofits customer account information to accommodate thenew gk)bal, legal, and competitive environment,resulting in potentially huge problems for the bank. Itwas not poised to leverage customer account intor-mation in it,s global operations. For example, cus-tomers with sufficient credit across accounts couldnot trade or borrow on their full balance. Trackingcusioiuei- balante^ lor individual and multipleaccounts, closing all the accounts (jf a cu.stomerbecause t)t criminal activities, and ensuring an accu-rate customer risk profile could ntjt be accomplishedwithout signllicant, erroi-prone human intervention.

Lack of an IPMAt Financial Company, an Il'M would have beenresponsible for monitoring and capturing consumerinfortnation needs continLially, reconciling those var-ied needs, and transforming the knowledge gainedinto a process of continuous improvement. Withoutan IPM. Financial Company established few informa-tion process measures or controls. For example, thebank had no controls to ensure that cu.stomer riskprofiles were regularly updated/ It neither standartl-ized nor inspected the account creation piocess. As aresult, it established no metrics to determine howmanv accounts were created on time and whether

97

Siaan Management ReviewSiinime( 1998

Lee • Pipno • Strong

98

customer inforniatif)n in those accounts was LipdatL-d.Because management gave its attention to revenue-generating operations such as trading, the IT depart-nicnl found itself responding reactively to ad hoc re-quests trom the trading department for updated cus-tomer account information. Had Financial Companyappointed an IFM. it wtiuld have enjoyed better riskmanagement and customer serviee — two factors crit-ical for success in the financial industry.

Product or By-Product: Five FactorsManagers can alvvays view and manage informatifmas the by-product of a system or an event. From theperspective of the people using the information.however, it is a product, not a by-product. In con-trasting the by-product approach to the information-as-product approach, there are five factors to analyze:what is managed, liow it is managed, why it is man-aged, wliat is success, and who manages it (seeTable 1).

What Is Managed?Oi'gani/ations oflen focais inappropriately on manag-ing the life cycle of the hardware and software sys-tems [hat produce the information instead of on iheinformation itself. As a result, they fail to capture theadditional knowledge necessary to achieve meaning-ful intormation t[Liality. For example, at EyewearCompany, the grinding instructions were distinctfrtmi, and just as important as, the actual lenses. Ifthe instructions were incorrect, the lenses would he

incorrect. In the course of selling the eyeglasses tothe customer, the focus was on the system that cap-tures and transmits the information and not on theform in which the inft)rmation was delivered to ihegrinder.

How Is Information Managed?In the by-protkict approach, hecause tlie organiza-tion's focus is on the life cycle of the hardware andsoftware systems, the means of producing informa-tion hecome ends in themselves. Managers focus onindividual components of the systems and attempt toestablish cost controls on tho.se components. Theyview the.se components in isolalion from one anotherinstead of Uvaiing them as an integraletl wliole.

The situation at Hyewear Company demonstrateswhat can happen when an organization fcx'uses pure-ly on components. When asked for lens rework fig-ures, ihe IT director .stated, "We know we have ISpercent errors." Left unstated was the assumption thateveryone attrihuted the errors to the grindingmachines. All the attention was on the hardware andsoftware components of lens production, nol on thelens specifications. It took outside observers to recog-nize that communicalion pi'obiems helween opticiansand grinders led to the high error rate. Many prob-lems resulted from mismatches between how opti-cians wrote orders and how grinders read tho.seorders. For example, opticians ustxi special instruc-tion lines on the form to add information. Tiiegrinders ignored thai information hecause they did

Table 1Information as Product or By-Product

What is managed?

How is it managed?

Why manage it?

What is success?

Who manages it?

Product

• Information• Information product life cycle

• Integrated, cross-functional approach• Encompass information suppliers, manu-

facturers, and consumers

• Deliver quality information products toconsumers

• Quality information product continuouslydelivered over the product life cycle

• No garbage in, garhage-out (GIGO)!

• CIO• Information product manager

By-product

• Hardware and software• Systems life cycle

• Integrate stovepipe systems• Control of individual components• Cost controls

• Implement quality hardware and softwaresystems

• The system works• No bugs• Short-term perspective

• CIO• IT director and database administrators

Wang • tee • Pipino • Strong Sloan Managemenl ReviewSummer 1998

Too often, IT departments emphasize

improving the quality of the delivery

system and its components rather than

optimizing the quality of the information

product delivered to the consumer.

not cxpeci lo find grinding specifications there. ITalso contriluiU'd to the problem. The MIS directorgave his attention o Lipgratlcs of hardware and soit-ware and did not jxiy .sufficient aitcnlion to iKnveach function interpreted the information being trans-mitted. No one held a cross-functional perspective.

Failing lo treaf lens specifications as an informationprotluct witb tbe grinder u,s consumer resulted in theregrintling of approximately 40,000 lenses per year.The problem was 'posting tbe company more than $1million annually in reworking expenses, not to men-tion oilier costs suL'b as those associated with cus-tomer dissatisfaction. In focusing on the componentsof lens production, Kyewear C.onipany was not treat-ing the opticians and grinders, in their roles as infor-mation suppliers and consumers, as part of an inte-grated system.

Financial Company provides another example of amisplaced emphasis on individual components. Asnoted earlier, databases were optimized at the locallevel Lmci were no. truly iniegratetl. The aeeoiintiiKinagers, who were tbe internal information con-smiKTS, had local inibrniatitm for local needs. Butthese managers di'J not ba\e access to the integrateti,global information required to exploit emergingopportunities. The partial information that accountmanagers receivec hindered their ability to managelisk. imprcH'e serv ce, and increase revenue.

Why Manage Infoimation?loo often, rr tlepurtnients emphasize inipro\'ing the(|ualii\' of the tieli'/ery system and its coni[")onentsrather ihan optimizing the quality of tbe informationprotluct deliverecl to ihe c^msLnner.' The latterapproach retiLiires a thorough knowledge of the eon-sLimer's infornuiticiii needs antl (juality criteria.

Hyewear C ionipany ilkisuates the mispiacetl emphasison coni[")onent improvement. Opticians putting infor-

mation in the special in.stmction section of the orderf(jrms was an example of "improving" tbe order-writing component as opposed to improving thequality of information supplied to the grinder. Itmade the opticians' task easier at the consumers'(grinders') expense.

In contrast. Data Company was rapidly evolvingtoward managing information as product. It wasbeginning to manage tbe entire information deliver^'process as an integrated system. It adopted a compa-nywide total quality management program andinvested in modernizing its technology infrastructure.'The company worked with its information suppliersto produce better information. It instituted j^irocedurestbat enaliled information consimiers to repoit infor-mation quality problems directly. Because the compa-tiy tailored its information products to individualclients, it recognized tiie need to be a proactive part-ner with its clients.

Even with all this attention to an integrated productionpiocess, communication problems remained. Forexample. Data Company had problems pricing itsprockict because fixed costs were not communicatedeffectively within (be company. The cost diita wereaccurate but were not represented in a way that tbetnarketing department could u.se. For example, datasLich as management overhead were not appropriatelycomnumicateci to tbe sales force. As a result. DataCompany's sales force did not trust the IT depart-ment's eost data and continued to ignore the manage-ment overhead in its contract bidding pricing. The sit-uation prompted tbe marketing executive vice presi-dent to state. "1 may not price strictly based on cost,but I need to know the cost." The company's profitmargins remained low despite its predominant jiositionin a competitive market. One reason tbat a companymanages information as product is to avoid tbe abovepn.)blems by ensuring that everyone understands the[lurpose behind the need for information.

What Is Success?l-'mploying an information-as-product approach insteadof a by-prodiKt approach chatiges tbe measures of suc-cess. Rather tlian judge tbe success of tbe computer sys-tem based on ba\ ing no bugs, companies that take anIP approach measure the information s fitness lor con-sumer use. Focusing on tbe computer system reflects ashort-term perspective. The initial information producedis without error, but little attention is given to ebangesoccurring later in the protluct life cycle.

99

SiDan Managemenl ReviewSummer 1998

Wang • tee * Pipino • Strong

chemical Company's experience witb the quality ofits MSDSs over time, mentioned earlier, provides anexample of failing to recognize the need to deliver aquality information product over the product's lifeeycle. Although the information quality of MSDSs wasinitially high, it deteriorated over time. The companywas expected to update its MSDSs as new evidenceof hazards aro.se tlirough product use and new scien-tific discoveries. It often failed tt) do so. ChemicalCompany measured its success by the quality of its

100 initial MSDS, The life cycle of tbe MSDS prcxluct.however, is not necessarily the same as the life cycleof the chemical product. A truer measure of successwould account for the difference and assess the qual-ity of the MSDS over its iifc cycle.

Adopting an information-as-product

approach forces the firm to focus on the

information consumer, supplier, and

manufacturer collectively.

Who Manages Information?II coiiijianies lake an IP approach and manage acrossfunctions, they must adopt a management structureto tbis environment by appointing an inlbriiiationproduct manager. The positions of IPM and CIO arenot identical. Tbe CIO oversees the management ofthe firm's data repositories, among other responsibili-ties. The database administrator (DBA), a subordinatefunction reporting to the CIO, directly manages tberepositories. In the foui" companies we studied, .solu-

tions to information quality problems required man-agement intervention. Our research suggests that theperson doing the intervening should not be the DBA,whose traditional focus bas been to control whatenters the databases. The DBA does not typicallyfocus on the production and delivery of informationas a cross-fiinctional, integrated system involving sup-pliers, prtidueers, and consumers.

What was striking about the companies we studiedwas tbeir intuitive sense tbat they needed an IPM.Financial Company, Chemical Company. DataCompany, and Hyewear Company each bad an indi-vidual performing duties that we would a.s.sociatewith those of an 1PM. althougb tbey did not use tbatdesignation. They have taken un information-as-product view and have begun to manage informationwitb tbat in mincl.

Acting on the IP Approach PrinciplesIn examining tbe problems encountered by the fourcompanies, the need for an integrated approach tomanaging information becomes evident. By ack)ptingthe IP a]5]5roaeh, companies atld value in diverseways (see Table 2). Tbere are better internal commu-nications. Internal operations become more efficient.Company and customer objectives are aligned. Co.stsare reduced, revenues are increased, and new oppor-tunities emerge. Each improvement, in turn, .strength-ens the firm's eompetitive position in the market.Adopting an information-as-product approach forcesthe firm to focus on the information consumer, sup-plier, and manufacturer collectively. Tbis focus leadsto tbe discovery of new opportunities, the exploita-tion of tho.se opportunities, and tbe deployment of

Table 2

The Added Value in Managing Information as Product

Case

Financial Company

Eyewear Company

Chemical Company

Data Company

Key Product

Financial Services

Eyeglasses

Chemicals

Information

Value Added

• Enhance risk management• Improve customer service

• Reduce cost• Reduce cycle time

• Prevent product liability lawsuits

• Determine product cost• Increase revenue

Wang • Lee • Pipino • Strong Sloan Managemenl ReviewSummer 1998

resulting applications for enhanced profitability, com-petitive ad\'antage, and market dominance.

The goal is to ensure that the product is

fit for consumer use hecause, ultimately,

consumers judge a product's quality on

its fitness.

We liave argued for the need and benefits for manag-ing information as a product, ITnderstanding theseneeds and benefit;., however, is insufficient for deliv-ering quality information to consimiers. Organizationsnuisi not only adopt the information product view\nn also promote that view throughout. They musttise an integrated approach tt) managing information,treating the supplier, the manufacturer, and the con-sumer of information collectively as a system. Thisintegrated approat h demands that firms adhere to thefour IP management principles.

1. Understand NeedsThe information-as-product approach has one cleargoal: to deliver quality information to the consumer.The information delivered is a total pr<,)duct; it

Table 3

Information Quality Categories and Dimensions

Category

Intrinsic Information Quality

Accessibility Informatiun Quality

Contextual Information Quality

Representational InfoimationQuality

Dimensions

AccuracyQbjectivityBelievabilityReputation

AccessibilityEase of operationsSecurity

RelevancyValue addedTimelinessCompletenessAmount of information

InterpretabilityEase of understandingConcise representationConsistent representation

exhibits all the attributes that, in combination, meetor exceed the consumers expectations." Consumers'needs must be clearly established and understoodduring ever>' phase of the information product'sdevelopment and manufacture." The goal is to ensurethat the product is fit for consumer use because, ulti-mately, consumers judge a product's quality on its fit-ness." For example, stock quotes delayed by fifteenminutes are accLtrate but of little value to real-timestock traders. Companies should apply the hoLise-of-quality method to the task of delivering quality infor-mation ]")i(>diicts.''

Our research has shown that the context in whichthe consumer operates is an important determinant ofinformation needs.'" We have identified sixteen infor-mation quality dimensions, grouped into four cate-gories (see Table 3) that reflect the information con-sumer's perceptions of what constitutes cjuality infor-mation." Managers should embed the evaluations ofthese dimensions in all the processes that produceinformation for consumers, including systems designand development and the daily production and deliv-eiy of information." They should u,se the qualityattributes as vehicles for describing, measuring, anddiscussing problems.

At Financial Company, for example, the IF approachwould rec|uire the liank to understand the needs ofits information consumers in the tlifferent timctionaldepartments. With knowledge of its information con-sumers' needs, the company can design and developa new companywide cu.stomer account database. Anew database alone, however, will solve neither theirshort-term nor long-term problems. Financial Cx)m-pany must institute stantlardized and controlled pro-cedures for collecting and updating data, openingnew accounts, and maintaining investor risk profiles.Tt also needs policies that state when and how toperform updates and who should authorize them.

2. Manage the ProcessTreating information as a product requires treatingthe information production process as though it wereproducing a physical product for a customer Theprocess must be well defined and must contain ade-quate controls, including quality assurance, inspec-tion, and production and delivery time management."In contrast, when information is treated as a by-product, the production process exists but often lackscontrols beyond the integrity constraints applied toinformation entering the database.

101

Sloan Management ReviewSummer 1998

Wang • tee • Pipmo • Stiong

The information production process that managementarticulates must be validated against the actual oper-ating process. Eyewear Company's failure to untler-stand how its process operated cost the company $1million per year. The recognition that the opticians'measurements served as information products for thegrinders wouid have led the company to imp(jsequality controls on the optician.

Chemical Company had a (")rt>cess to create each102 material safety data sheet. Although the company

developed the process to create an information prod-uct, it did not manage it with the same controls thatthe company used for its chemicals. At FinancialCompany, the process of creating customer accountswas neitiier well defined nor controlled; the accountmanagers who created cu.stomer accounts knew thegoal —' a new cu.stomer account should exist in thecomputer system — but they u.sed whatever tech-niques were convenient to create an accoimt. ff acustomer account existed, managers used that infbr-mati(.m fi"om the account to open a new accountwithoLit verifying whetiiei" the information was stillvalid. A well-defined and managed process wouldhave incluciei.1 quality controls to ensure that newaccounts had \crifiable, up-to-date information.

A Web site is an information product,

and site visitors are information con-

sumers.

3. Manage the Life CycleInformation should be managed o\er its product lifecycle in the same way as a successful physical prod-uct." With a pliysical product, modification andimprovement at different stages of a product's lifecycle ensures that the protluct remains competitive inthe market. The extent of the changes and the titneinterval between changes depend on the nature ofthe product, the need it .satisfies, and the competiti\-eenvironment in which it is sold. So it is with informa-tion. The degree and frequency of changes to infor-mation products depend on the type and nature ofthe information, the tasks the information supports,and the changing context in which the information isused.

c;hemical C<.)mpany provides an example of why an

information product needs to be managed over itslife cycle. As new hazards are discovered, the newscientific evidence niList be incorporated into theMSDS. This iteraiive process of obtaining new c\i-dence of hazards and updating the MSDS to reflectthe new evidence is a classic example of the lifecycle of an information product.

At Financial Compamy, customer account informationwas an information product. O\-er time, what consti-tuted high-cjuaiity customer account informationchanged. Failure to ctintinuously im]")ro\e the produc-tion process and the product resulted in informationthat was no longer fit foi" use. Consumers eitherstopped Lising ihe product and developed their cnvninformation products or continued to use the inferiorproduct, suffering the consequences of deteriorationin the quality of work. Had Financial Companyapplied the ISO 9000 standards for t|ualit\- manage-ment, these problems could ha\e been mitigated.''

The World Wide Web sites of many companies pro-vitle a further example. A Web site is an informationjiroduct. and site \isitors are information consumers.Presumably, the Web site contains high-quality infor-mation that the company wishes to con\'ey to its cu,s-lomers. Unfortunately, many companies do not treatthe Web site as an information product. As the WallStreet Jounicd reportetl, businesses leave "cyber-space increasingly littered \\ ith digital debris — Websites neglected or altogether ahaneioned hy their cre-ators.""'

4. Appoint an IPMThe designation of an information product manageris necessary to ensure that relevant, high-qualityinformation prodLicts are delivered to consumers. TheIPM's key responsibility is to coordinate and managethe three major stakeholder groui^s: the supplier ofraw information, the producer or manufacturer of ihedeliverable information, and the consumer of theinformation. 1\) cany out this responsibility, the IPMmust apply an integrated, cross-functional manage-ment approach. The IPM orchestrates and directs theinformation production process during the piotluct'slife cycle to deliver t]uality information to the con-sumer.

De Facto IPMs. As indicated previously, tlie ft)urcompanies had an intuitive, if not cleady articulated,sense o[ iiow the information product should bemanaged.

Wang • tee • Pipina • Shong Sloan Management ReviewSummer 1998

Financial Company hired a new IT director, who wasknowledgeable about information quality concepts,prt)ccss cnj^ineering, and husiness applications, thusinaugurating the h:ink'.s transition loward an IP per-spective. Acting as a de tacto II'M. the director heganto institute a cro.ss-functional approach. With supportfrom the CEO. he Lonstructed a work-flow model ofthe cu.stomer account II' protcss that integrated clientservices, husiness operations, and the IT department.

At Data Company, the !'l' director and a senior vicepresident who reported to ihe CKO .shared the tunc-tions of the IPM. Ibgether, they oversaw and man-aged the company's Inrorniation suppliers, tlie in-hou.se information produetit)n. and the clients whowere consumers of their information products.Cliemical C^ompany also had an IPM in the making.This manager was assigned to ereate tlie necessaryeross-lunttional approaeh to ensure that the MSOSmet high-quality s andarcis throughout the life cycleofthe correspond: nji ehcmical produet, anti. as such,throughout the life cycle of the MSDS.

IPM's Responsibilities. The IPM must incorporate therequirements of ll,e ihrec stakeholders at eaeli stageof the information product life cycle (see Table 4).Haeh stakehokier ^roup, however, may have more

than one constituent. Financial Company had manysources of raw information that were used in devel-oping its final information products, hence, multipleconstituents in the information supplier stakeholdergroup. Financial Company also serviced many infor-mation consumers. The same information, however,might he a different produet to each consumer.

In eiicilin^ the stakeholders' re(|uirements and inte-grating these into the information produet, the IFM isresponsible for different tasks over the course of thelife cycle. During the introductory- stage, the primarytask is design and development, an engineeringeffort. During the growth stage, the emphasis is onimproving anti monitoring the information protluct.As the information protluct matures, the main task ismaintenante, with an emphasis on monitoring.Attention to these major tasks over tbe life cycle Istritical. For example. Chemical Company ensuredproper development antl prodLietion ot its informa-tion produet, the MSDS, dtiring the introductorystage. Its legal liability problems arose because theeompany paid insufficient attention to the mainte-nance of the MSDSs after their initial protluttion.

During design and development, the IPM miisi con-centrate on accurately speeifying the consumers'

103

Table 4Responsibilities of the Information Product Manager

Stakeholder

Information Consumer

Information Manufacturer

Information Supplier

Engineering

Define information and quality fea-tures consumers need today and inthe future.

Define consumers' information quali-ty standards today and in the future.

Define information productionprocess, given consumer needs.

Define information process quality

controls.

Develop information process and

controls

Define raw information inputs, giventhe process and consumer needs.

Define raw input quality standards.

Develop procedures to obtain andcontrol information inputs.

Monitoring

Measure information quality as per-

ceived by consumers.

Analyse gaps between measure-

ments and quality standards.

Measure quality of the process.

Analyze gaps between measure-

ments and quality standards.

Measure quality of raw informationinputs.

Analyze gaps hetween informationinput measurements and qualitystandards.

Improvement

Provide feedback to information con-sumers on delivery of quality informa-tion today and in the future.

Evaluate henefits and costs of altema-

tive information process improvements-

Prioritize process improvements.

Implement process improvements.

Evaluate benefits and costs of alter-natives to information inputs.

Prioritize improvements to informa-tion inputs.

Implement improvements to infor-mation inputs.

Sloan Managemeni Review

Summef 1998

Wang • Lee • Pipino • Strong

104

needs and rL-conciling those needs with the capabili-ties of [he information suppliers and informationmaniitacturens. To assess the current quality of theinformation jiroducts delivered to consumers, the IPMmust develop appropriate metrics.'" Further, there areinformation quality assessment tools that measure theconsumers' subjective assessment of informationquality."' Such a.ssessmcnts establish the baseline fromwhitli to make and measure future improvements.

The twenty-first century will witness only

two kinds of companies: those that exploit

IT and those that are out of business. But

for what purpose will they exploit it?

As pan of the monitoring pr<;)cess, the IPM must con-tinually measure the product's production and u.se todetermine when to modify it. Indeed, even "old"physical products require a product manager to keepthem "new and tmpro\ed," The emerging information([uality assessment tools can provide the mechanismsto measure and monitor the process. Periodic re-asse.ssments can determine whether the quality ofinformation is improving — both objectively and asperceived by intormation consumers.

Having a set of standards is critically important to themonitoring process. There must be standards thatdefine information along all the important tjualitydimensions of the information consumer. Further-more, under the leadership of the 1PM, these stan-dards should he continuously reviewed and im-proved to ensure that the quality of the informationitself is continuously improved. Analysis of variancesbetween the quality of the information products andconsumers' quality expectations provides the basis forimprovement.

The IPM uses knowledge obtained by monitoring to ini-tiate changes to the product — the continuous im-provement process. ContinuoLis improvement shouldstart as soon as the information producl is developed.As analyses during monitoring reveal gaps, the IPMshould undertake improvement. Because the standardsare continuously improvetl, gaps Ix'tween the standardand the actual will continue to exist. These gaps drivethe information quality improvement effort. The IPM's

task is to .set new quality goals based on evolving infor-mation consumer needs and to translate these goalsinto improvements in the raw iiiibrmation provided andthe information production process.

The IPM's duties are, in e.ssence, process manage-ment and coordination. Traditionally, the IT functionperformed information proce.ss management, if it wasperformed at ail. The IT function, however, has sel-tiom viewed information consumers as part of theprocess it managed, even in IT organizations with astrong consumer focus. The poor quality of organiza-tional information is commonly caused by the lack ofcoordination and of shared knowledge among infor-mation consumers, producers, and suppliers. Thusthe role and responsibilities of the IPM are critical fordelivering information that is fit for use by informa-tion consumers.

The IPM does not replace the CIO. The leadership ofthe IT function and its agenda rest with the CIO. TheIPM reports to the CIO and is charged with imple-menting and managing the integrated IP approach —the keystone of providing quality informationthroughout the organization.

ConclusionThe twenty-tirst century' will \\itness only two kindsof companies: those that exploit IT and those that areout of busine.ss. But for what purpose will theyexploit IT? To deliver quality information. Until busi-nesses manage inftjrmation as a product, they willnot deliver high-quality information to consumersconsistently and reliably. The results will be lowermargins, missed opportunities, and tarnished images.

The path to an IP approach begins with a strong cus-tomer orientation. Meeting customers' informationquality needs is foremo.st. Top management mustmake a commitment to the IP approach and supportthe IPM function. With the proper focus and commit-ment in place, the IPM can diagnose the informationquality problem and develop innovative .solutions. Inso doing, the IPM can adapt proven best practicesand deploy established total quaiity managementmethodologies.

In an increasingly networked world, information ofvaiying tjuality is being aggregated for busine.ss use.Senior management's course of action is clear: view,manage, and deliver information as a product.

Wang • Lee • Pipino • Strong Sloan Management ReviewSummer 1998

References

• 1 SE Madnick, "Dstaba!;e in Ihe Internet Age,"Database Programming & Lesign. January 1997, pp.28-33

• 2. T.C. Kinnear and K. Benhardt, Principles ofMarketing, third edition (Gliinview, Illinois. ScottForesman/Little, Brown, 19SI0J.• 3. R.Y. Wang, Y.W. Lee, a id D. Strong. "Can YouDefend Your Information in Court?," Proceedings ofthe 1996 Conference on Information Quality(Cambridge, Massachusetts. MIT Total Data OualityManagement Program, 199)), pp. 53-64.

• 4. B.K. Kahn. D.M Stronc, and R.Y Wang."Information Quality Benchmarks: Product andService Performance," Communications oftf)eAssociation for Computing Macfiinery, forthcoming.• 5. PB, Crosby, Quality Witfiout Tears\Hew Yo±McGraw-Hill, 1984);E.W. Deming, Out of the Crisis (Cambridge,Massachusetts: MIT Center for AdvancedEngineering Study, 1986); aidA.V. Eeigenbaum, Total Quality Control, third editionINew York McGraw-Hill, i:)91),

• 6 M.H. Meyer and M.H. Zack, "The Design andDevelopment of Information Products." Sloan

Management Review, volume 37, Spring 1996, pp43-59.

• 7 DA Garvin, "Quality on the Line," W fvafrfBusiness Review, volume 61, September-October1983, pp. 65-75.

• 8, J.M. Juran, Juran on Leadership for Quality: AnExecutive Handbook (New York: Free Press, 1989).• 9, J.R, Hauser and D. Clausing, "The House ofQuality," Harvard Business Fleview, volume 66, May-June 1988, pp. 63-73

• 10. D M. Strong, YW Lee, and R.Y Wang, "DataQuality in Context," Communications of the ACM.volume40, Mayl997, pp. 103-110.• 11. R Y Wang and D M. Strong, "Beyond Accuracy.What Data Quality Means to Data Consumers,"Journal of Management Information Systems, vol-ume 12, Spring 1996, pp. 5-34.• 12. R.Y Wang, "A Product Perspective on TotalData Quality Management," Communications ofAssociation for Computing Machinery, volume 41,Februaryl998, pp. 58-65.• 13. O.P. Ballon, R.Y Wang, H, Pazer, and G K.Tayi,"Modeling Information Manufacturing Systems toDetermine Information Product Quality,"Management Science, volume 44, April 1998, pp.462-484; and DM Strong and S.M. Miller.

"Exceptions and Exception Handling in ComputerizedInformation Processes," ACM Transactions onInformation Systems, volume 13, issue 2,1995, pp.206-233.

• 14. P Cykana, A. Paul, and M. Stern, "DoDGuidelines on Data Quality Management,"Proceedings ot the 1996 Conference on InformationOu3/fri/(Cambridge, Massachusetts MIT Total DataQuality Management Program, 1996), pp. 154-171.

• 15. ISO 9000 International Standards for QualityManagement {Geneva. Switzerland: InternationaiStandard Qrgamzation. 1992)

• 16. J. Sandberg, "At Thousands of Web Sites,Time Stands Still Many Web Sites Need Updating,"Tfie Wall Street Journal, \\ March 1997, p. 81.• 17 YW. Lee, D M Strong, L. Pipino, and R.YWang, A Methodology-Based Software Tool for TotalOata Quality /Wanagemenf (Cambridge,Massachusetts MIT Total Data Quality ManagementProgram, TDQM-97-02,1997).• 18. information Quality Assessment Survey:Administrator's Gwrfe [Cambridge, Massachusetts:Cambridge Research Group, 1997],

Reprint 3947

105

Sloan Management ReviewSummer 199B

Lee • Pipino • Sbong