Lessons from BI in Public Institutions
The study in this article provides reasons why BI is not fully implemented in some organizations. The thematic approach to determining why the technological tools are or are not used by managers provides an actionable set of areas where improvements can be made. One aspect that may relate to our discussions on asking the right questions is, "do managers really need to know how to use BI tools?" In many organizations, managers have enough knowledge about specialized data and tools to know how to task their specialists (BI analysts, in this case) to use them to answer their requirements. This can give analysts too much power in organizations with poor systems, whose data quality is questionable, or with authoritarian cultures where analysts fear giving the "wrong" answer. But in a highly effective environment, managers manage, and analysts analyze.
Research design and methodology
Data analysis
Data were analysed at two levels: quantitative analysis and qualitative analysis. In the former case, the researchers drew conclusions from the data sets and determined the statistical significance of the collected data sets, which contain daily management logon statistics for analytics. The findings from the data sets increase the validity and reliability of the study and complement the qualitative outcomes. In the latter case, qualitative analysis involved the reduction, organisation, interpretation and substantiation of data. The main purpose was to identify themes and patterns embedded in the text. The researchers used thematic analysis with these themes derived from the theoretical framework of Grubljesic and Jaklic. The following themes were explored: individual characteristics, systems quality, organisational factors, macro-environment factors, behavioural beliefs and attitudes, effort perceptions, social influence, facilitating conditions, and 'other'.