POCs As A Problem

Bill Vorhies argues that data science proofs of concept fall short of the mark:

If you do a quick read through of some of the Gartner or O’Reilly studies you’ll quickly see that a lack of executive sponsorship is one of the major barriers to adoption.  So isn’t the POC a good way to get the attention of the C-level?  Yes and no.

If as we described above it leads to the adoption of a series of stand alone ‘technology projects’, then no.  If it was really necessary to start with little firecracker POCs to demonstrate the explosive strategic value of becoming data-driven, then maybe so.

Here’s a simple change of mindset (borrowed from John Weathington referenced above) that instead of focusing on Proof of Concept, we should instead create projects to demonstrate Proof of Value.  By focusing on value we change the orientation so that any projects are aligned with value to the company.  In other words, they are aligned with the company’s strategic objectives.

This is an interesting argument which goes against my inclinations.  Check it out.

Related Posts

Kafka And The Differing Aims Of Data Professionals

Kai Waehner argues that there is an impedence mismatch between data engineers, data scientists, and ML production engineers: Data scientists love Python, period. Therefore, the majority of machine learning/deep learning frameworks focus on Python APIs. Both the stablest and most cutting edge APIs, as well as the majority of examples and tutorials use Python APIs. […]

Read More

Solving The Monty Hall Problem With R

Miroslav Rajter builds a Monty Hall problem simulator using R: The original and most simple scenario of the Monty Hall problem is this: You are in a prize contest and in front of you there are three doors (A, B and C). Behind one of the doors is a prize (Car), while behind others is […]

Read More


May 2016
« Apr Jun »