Wednesday, September 5, 2007

Using MIS, Kroenke, P.13, concern

I think that Kroenke should reword the phrasing for a particular component in the characteristics of good information.

The section I am discussing is on page 13, first paragraph in our class textbook “Using MIS.” Kroenke states that “information needs to be sufficient for the purpose for which it is, but just barely so.”

I have a problem with this.

Currently the acronym we are using for good information in SMART

S ufficient
worth its M oney
A ccurate
R elevant
T imely

I believe that good information should be efficient. Slightly efficient implies that the information is sub par. I understand his point that he tries to make. He tries to justify that good information should be sufficient as to not over load the user with excessive information. If his aim is to make sure that information does not over load the user then I think he would want the information to be efficient.

That is my snag. Good information is efficient, not sufficient. None the less for testing purposes I will pretend good information should be sufficient but after this class I will not allow myself to believe this. Good information is efficient. Efficiency is vital, not just in business, but in life.

3 comments:

Fang said...

I aggree with the word efficient. But this word has too many levels of meanings. Think the term "worth money", it is the efficient way to produce information. Basically, information should be produced efficiently so it is not too costly and it can produce value by being able to help people make quality decisions. Therefore, sufficient I would say is just one level of being efficient. You should be provided with enough information being able to make good decision so as to bring business value. But you don't want too much information to distract you, cost you too much time to absorb. It may not always be true. But it is quite a practical criterion used in the industry.

Good thinking though. It is good to see your thinking progressively.

DanK said...

pWned! jk

Anonymous said...

efficient......is it infinate or is there a maximum????