Enough complaining about the broken bits of Business Intelligence; it's time to highlight the things that are good and right in the industry. Like most industries, the renewal and innovation occurs at the fringe, beyond the comfort zone of established vendors.

I've created five categories and a catch-all to capture the solutions and companies (not so much technologies) that are leading the next generation of Business Intelligence. The categories are:

• Analyst tools
• Dashboards
• Targeted solutions
• Open-source and free
• Advanced visualizations
• Other stuff

Naturally I've focused on areas of Juice expertise and focus -- not coincidentally, the places where we feel BI has neglected end-users. According to a study by the Business Application Research Center, BI end-user adoption sits at a lowly 8%.

I'm happy to take your suggestions (and update the post) for things I've missed in these categories or for entirely new categories.

Analyst tools

Tools that make it easy for analysts to pull data from multiple sources, analyze, visualize and share it.

Winner: Tableau, the reigning king of visual analytics tools, has added more web-based functionality to allow for online sharing and collaboration.

Runner-up: Good Data has arrived on the market with a web-first platform designed to democratize analytics. I had a chance to get a demo from the management team and was impressed with the ease of use and high-quality data presentation.

Dashboards

"A frequently updated analytical display that is clear and concise" (via a recent post)...and not likely to draw the rage of Stephen Few.

Winner: BonaVista Systems wants to make Excel a "first choice dashboard tool." From the humble position of sparkline plug-in vendor, BonaVista has taken a leadership role in encouraging more effective dashboard design.

Runner-up (tie): Two BI companies, Qlikview and Microstrategy, seem to be following BonaVista's lead. Unfortunately, they may only be dipping in a toe as I found just a couple examples that break from the traditional over-glossy, gauge-riddled dashboard interface.

• Qlikview

• Microstrategy

Targeted solutions

Companies that serve a narrow slice of the BI world extremely well. The desire to be all things to all people has been an Achilles Heel of the BI industry. The general purpose BI platforms often prove too broad and too generic to serve the unique problems of specific industries or functional areas.

Winner: Wall Street on Demand is a brilliant, below-the-radar provider of information solutions to the financial sector. Their sparse, articulate marketing text and few screenshots hint at a company that knows exactly what they do and deliver high-quality BI solutions. I wish I knew more.

Runner-up (multiple): The following are just a few companies that have focused on an industry or functional segment to deliver targeted BI solutions:

• Quantivo for customer behavior analytics
• Visual I|O for pharmaceuticals
• LucidEra for sale pipeline reporting and analytics

Open-source and free

(I know there is a difference.)

Winner: Pentaho offers an open-source end-to-end BI suite that is a competitive alternative to the big-guys. Of course, the implementation it isn't necessarily cheap or easy.

Runner-up: If anything should scare the BI industry, it is the possibility of a Google Analytics model extended into more general data analysis and visualization tools. Google Fusion Tables may just be the tip of the iceberg.

Advanced visualizations

Bringing leading-edge visualization techniques out of academia and into the business world.

Winner: Many Eyes continues to impress with high-quality visualizations. They are easy to create and clean in design and usability. Impress your boss with a slick visualization in your next presentation.

Runner-up (tie): Openviz / Advanced Visual Systems and Panopticon appear to be the two BI vendors battling it out for leadership in advanced visualization solutions. Unlike Many Eyes, these guys lack Tufte-esque sophistication in infoviz design. That said, there is a big difference between creating a one-off New York Times-quality visualization and delivering a toolset that is re-usable in many different situations.

Other stuff to be admired

Free charts with good default design. InetSoft's Style Chart and Google Charts offer free, embeddable charts.

Jargon-free BI marketing. With few exceptions, BI web sites are densely populated with those awful stock-photography people sitting around conference tables (or worse, the ethnically-diverse V-formation marching at you) and meaningless business jargon and techno-babble. I really appreciate Blink Logic's web site with its straight talk and clean, readable design.

Beyond the desktop. RoamBI has a great-looking iPhone application that is designed to "transform your data into insightful, interactive visualizations delivered to the iPhone." It makes the Oracle and Qlikview iPhone apps look old-school.

Conventional wisdom says that an executive dashboard must fit on a single page or screen. The argument hinges on a pair of assertions about this constraint: it provides necessary discipline to focus on only the most critical information; and it enables the audience to see results "at a glance."

The "discipline" argument is made forcefully by Avinash Kaushik (among others).

"if your dashboard does not fit on one page, you have a report, not a dashboard...This rule is important because it encourages rigorous thought to be applied in selecting the golden dashboard metric."

I buy wholeheartedly into the value of constraints. However, defining a useful constraint as a "rule" assumes there is only one viable means to achieve the desired ends. Confining visual real estate is but one way to focus your thinking. There are others: How about limiting yourself to five key measures? How about demanding that a dashboard can be understood in 3 minutes by a new user? How about only presenting exceptions?

The argument that a one-page dashboard necessarily provides an view of your business "at a glance" is more self-deceiving. Well-known information-ista Stephen Few uses this rationale in his definition of a dashboard:

A visual display of the most important information needed to achieve one or more objectives; consolidated and arranged on a single screen so the information can be monitored at a glance. PDF

I check my speedometer "at a glance". I "glance" at a Heads-up Display (HUD) on a video game showing how much energy my character has remaining. These displays communicate but a single number that is already hovering on the corner of my consciousness. If we follow this advice literally, we'd show:

Assuming one page gives you quick, easy comprehension is like assuming all red cars are fast. That's simply not true. It must be duly noted, however, that all red cars are cool.

More often, people follow the one-page dashboard rule off a cliff like these folks.

There are real problems with this definition:

• In reality, the one-page rule leads to jamming information into the available space.
• When everything must fit on a page, there isn't room to describe the connections between information or fashion a story from the data.
• A good dashboard raises more questions than it can answer. Sticking to a static piece of paper limits any ability to find or present explanations.

Don't get me wrong: A one-page dashboard is often an effective way to create "a visual display of the most important information needed to achieve one or more objectives." But with streaming video, interactive visualizations, podcasts, Kindles, smart phones, video projectors...is it really necessary to limit ourselves to 8.5" x 11" piece of paper. Or might we open ourselves up to some more creative solutions to sharing the numbers; a short movie, a few slides, a short text narrative, or 140 characters.

I'd like to use this definition instead and will be back soon with some ideas on how to make your dashboards clear and concise.

Twitter’s wild popularity hasn’t obscured the fact that the service needs to eventually make money. The concept of “Twitter analytics” as a revenue stream has come up often enough to make my ears itch and my nose burn.

Twitter’s new business development lead explains that the company is “developing a range of analytics and metrics products and services built around the information contained in tweets”…and “trying to figure out what are the appropriate metrics around engagement and how to convey those.”

Web Strategist Jeremiah Owyang raises the concept of a Twitter CRM solution, in which Twitter would offer their own analytics system to brands, that will help them to track and manage the conversations.

The Twitter ecosystem has responded with a wide range of tools for analysis of Twitter data. Web analytics behemoth Omniture recently announced the integration of Twitter data into their platform. At the same time, web analytics consultant Eric T. Peterson has been vigorously marketing Twitalyzer, a tool to evaluate individuals’ use of Twitter and metrics of influence. Google’s Chrome Experiments released a cool visualization tool called Social Collider that reveals cross-connections between conversations on Twitter. Here are a few more Twitter analytics tools that I’ve run across:

• TwitterAnalyzer
• TwitterFriends
• TweetEffect
• Tweetstats
• Twitturly
• Thummit Quickrate
• Twist
• TweetVolume

Despite all the activity, I haven’t yet seen a solution that offers the kind of valuable analytics that a company could use to understand the Twitter conversation relevant to their business. The applications above are either focused on the measurement of individual Twitter users or offer a high-level tracking of words and phases in the general conversation. They treat tweets as transactions — How many? How valuable? Who’s listening? Who’s responding?

To me, the great and more rewarding challenge in Twitter analytics is to synthesize the substance of those conversations. Imagine if you went to a party and could overhear everything that everyone else was saying. Who talked the most and who had the greatest audience is less interesting than what topics people were discussing and what was said.

I wanted to take a shot at this type of Twitter analytics.

Analysis Approach

First I had to define a particular domain or topic area. For expediency, I focused on all the tweets that included the word “analytics.” Using the Twitter search API, I pulled the first 500 tweets for each day in March and parsed the results to pull out users, urls, and other characteristics of the tweets.

To analyze the words and phrases being used, I uploaded the resulting 11,300 tweets into Concentrate, our search analytics tool. Concentrate is optimized for search query text (i.e. short phrases without a lot of punctuation). Nevertheless, it has a number of features that make text analysis easier, including breaking out the most common words, phrases and patterns. It also allows for filtering by words to create frequency statistics.

There were two main questions I wanted to address:

1. What topics are people discussing?
2. What is the structure of the conversation?

Topics of Conversation

The content of the Twitter conversation can be analyzed as words, sites/links, people/groups, and company/products.

Words

I used Concentrate to find the most common words, then I dumped those words into Many Eyes to create this “Wordle-brand” word cloud. Many Eyes has a nice feature that takes out the “common English words.” Clearly Google dominates the conversation, and I even had to artificially reduced the value to make the other words legible.

Below are the top 10 (non-common) words that show up in the analytics conversation

Sites and Links

Twitter has become a mechanism for sharing interesting links (I’ll get to data on that in a bit). Looking at the most popular sites and specific links gives a sense for what people in this community are reading and talking about.

People and Groups

Twitter users have a few conventions for connecting tweets to people or groups:

• ”#” (i.e. hashtag) associates the message with associated with a group, topic or event.
• “RT” (or “via”) is to repeat or “retweet” something someone else has said.
• ”@” associates a tweet with another user, whether retweeting their message or directing a comment to them.

Here are the most common groups and people referenced in the Twitter data.

And the people with the most tweets using the word “analytics”

Companies and Products

I was also interested in what companies or products were referred to most frequently. It is no surprise that Google dominates the conversation. Microsoft gets on the board with the recently closing of their adCenter product. I think we can safely assume they won’t be showing up that often in the future.

Conversation Structure

Beyond the specific content of the conversation, I was also curious about how people who are talking about analytics tend to use Twitter.

Types of Tweets

Eric T. Peterson has four things he considers “signal” (versus “noise”) in the Twitter conversation:

• References to other people (defined by the use of “@” followed by text)
• Links to URLs you can visit (defined by the use of “http://” followed by text)
• Hashtags you can explore and participate with (defined by the use of “#” followed by text)
• Retweets of other people, passing along information (defined by the use of “rt”, “r/t/”, “retweet” or “via”)

While I’m not fond of this definition, examining these different types of tweets (along with question-based tweets) provides a good lens into the nature of the conversation. The following chart shows the percentage of tweets that fall into each of those categories.

It would be all the more interesting if you could follow the types of tweets across time and compare against other topic areas. I suspect that the URL linking within Twitter is on the rise and is turning Twitter into a Delicious-style bookmark sharing service — without the functionality to save, tag, annotate, and view the bookmarks at your leisure.

Link Evolution

Given all the sharing of links, I wanted to get a clearer picture of what happens when a link becomes popular. The graphic below shows some of the top links during the month and the amount they showed up in tweets by day. The red bars represent days where ten or more tweets included the link. A couple links demonstrated popularity over a week or so, but the rest sizzled then disappeared in a day or two.

Activity Distribution

Finally, I took a look at the distribution of users by the number of tweets including the word “analytics.” It was no surprise that the vast majority of the 7,700 twitterers only used the word once in March (of course this doesn’t tell us about their other twittering activity). Obviously there is a small population of people at the core of the discussion.

While you'd have to go into more depth to answer detailed questions, there are a number of interesting take-aways for me, including:

• “Analytics” means “web analytics”, not business intelligence or general reporting about sales, operations, or marketing.
• Google Analytics is the star of the party. Of course, the fact that the brand name includes "analytics" is an advantage, but I didn't see a giant "Juice" in the word cloud.
• Twitter is an echo-chamber. The content clusters around particular subjects, with people retweeting and sharing links about the big news of the day. There are a dozen or so stories that dominated the conversation over this time period.

What’s next?

There are a lot more views of this data that could be enlightening for a company interested having a real-time understanding of their marketplace. For example, it would be interesting to provide more insight into:

• Who is at the center of these conversations?
• What is the positive or negative tone of the discussion (Twitter actually offers this information as part of their API)?
• How has is the conversation changing over time?
• What is the best way to define the boundaries of a domain-specific conversation?

These are the types of questions that I’d like to see addressed in a more complete Twitter analytics tool.

This is a follow up to "Target Long Tail Searches with Keyword Patterns"

To get a sense of the scale of the long tail in search, Dustin Woodard recently put together an analysis of U.S. search data collected by Hitwise over a 3 month period, during which they measured 14 million different search terms. How did these break down?

• Top 100 terms: 5.7% of the all search traffic
• Top 500 terms: 8.9% of the all search traffic
• Top 1,000 terms: 10.6% of the all search traffic
• Top 10,000 terms: 18.5% of the all search traffic

This means if you had a monopoly over the top 1,000 search terms across all search engines (which is impossible), you’d still be missing out on 89.4% of all search traffic. There’s so much traffic in the tail it is hard to even comprehend. To illustrate, if search were represented by a tiny lizard with a one-inch head, the tail of that lizard would stretch for 221 miles.

Yesterday, we described the concept of search patterns and how you can use them to summarize this type of long tail text data. Today, we will walk through a case study we put together to explain how Concentrate's pattern discovery feature will help you find new competitive insights.

You can replicate this study yourself by signing up for the Plus version of Concentrate and loading competitive search data from providers like Hitwise, Compete, Keyword Discovery, or comScore. The input search data used in our analysis consisted of a sample of unique queries leading to clicks on top travel domains during Spring 2006, along with their frequency of occurrence (the chart is truncated after the 20th query):

Raw search data: most frequent queries by site

We loaded the full dataset of queries into Concentrate to generate summary patterns for each of 5 top travel sites. After each file of unique queries and associated metrics is loaded, the application generates reports which include summary statistics based on the head (top 50) and tail queries for each site. This is a good way to start looking at the data if we want to get a sense of each site's long tail search strategy:

Head vs. tail queries for top travel sites

It appears that the long tail makes up the overwhelming majority of traffic for the travel planning and review sites, but is a much smaller percentage for transaction focused sites like Expedia and Travelocity. Measuring the size of the head and tail gives us a rough idea what is going on, but we need to dig deeper if we want to benchmark where we stand in various categories and produce actionable insights. Inspired by a recent New York Times infographic "Words They Used", our data visualization guru, Chris Gemignani, downloaded the Pattern CSV file that Concentrate generated for each of these sites and created the following view of competition in the travel search sector:

Comparing travel searches by pattern

This chart compares the proportion of searches that go to each travel site for the top 25 patterns in the travel sector. The site getting the most traffic for each pattern is highlighted. Only searches that wound up at one of these five travel sites are considered.

The difference in search pattern profiles for these sites is striking. Tripadvisor leads the pack in the long tail, which makes sense given the huge amount of long tail user generated content on the site. TripAdvisor owns most of the pattern categories, but Yahoo Travel and Hotel-Guides take the lead in niche areas like maps and hotels. Traffic to Expedia and Travelocity is largely composed of navigational and branded queries (not shown). The only long tail patterns they have significant share for are "[x] ticket", and "cheap [x]".

The input data we used reflects referrals to these sites from a sample population of users who clicked on search engine result pages. Factors which will affect the number and type of search referrals a site received in this data include: how representative the sample is of the population of U.S. searchers as a whole, how much relevant content a site has for a given query pattern, and how well that content ranks in google and other search engines.

If a travel website repeated this study with Concentrate using current competitive data, then uploaded additional search data for their own site including other metrics beyond search frequency (see our demo using Google Analytics), the results might reveal that "things to do in [x]" queries lead to high quality visits and their site has a chance at winning more searches for that pattern. Based on this information they might decide to make a move on TripAdvisor in that content category. Mark Jackson describes some strategies to apply within the travel sector in an article at Search Engine Watch: Should Your SEO Strategy Target the Head or the Long Tail?. Using Concentrate, a travel website could streamline the process by downloading thousands of real queries for this pattern sent to their competitor:

Some queries in TripAdvisor pattern: "things to do in [x]"

Take Action: Some ideas for next steps

• Use Concentrate patterns to segment your sites query referrals, then estimate revenue opportunities for underperforming long tail categories and target your efforts accordingly
• Expand into new content areas based on trends discovered in long tail search patterns over time and ensure your site's information supply (PDF) matches customer demand
• Get a subscription to Concentrate Plus and repeat this case study for your industry
• Use your industry search patterns as a guide to optimize internal website architecture
• Jumpstart your SEM efforts by using Concentrate to automatically create tight adgroups containing similar queries found within long tail each pattern
• Use your patterns as templates for dynamic filters within your website to show targeted ads, content, related links, or content recommendations based on query referral strings
• If you are a financial analyst or product planner, spot emerging trends in the long tail with Concentrate and use the information to guide decision making

On Friday, we launched our new search analytics product: Concentrate. One of its key features is a scalable algorithm that automatically discovers patterns in large amounts of search data and clusters long tail queries into manageable groups. This post will explain how using Concentrate's pattern discovery feature can simplify search data analysis and give you an edge on the competition.

To explain how valuable Concentrate's pattern discovery can be, we put together a case study of the travel sector using the Plus version of Concentrate and the type of competitive search data available from commercial providers like Hitwise or Compete. We will go into the details tomorrow, but here is a sneak peek at the results. This chart shows the share of travel searches by site in Spring 2006 and was generated using reports downloaded from Concentrate pattern discovery:

Travel Sector Searches: Comparing sites by pattern share

The Long Tail of Search

Search analytics starts by looking at the most frequent search queries driving traffic to your site or that of your competitors (these are often called the "head queries"). For most sites, these queries are a fraction of your total search traffic and just the tip of the iceberg in terms of insight about your audience. Queries like "cheap hotels in liverpool ny" may only occur once or twice in a given month, but when aggregated with other rare phrases can make up the bulk of your traffic.

The concept of the long tail in business intelligence has been a topic of debate over the last few years. One area where the long tail is alive and well is in search. The landscape of user search queries is dominated by the long tail, and most studies indicate that referrals from these long tail phrases are more likely to lead to purchases on your site. Natural search isn't the only area where the long tail turns out to be critical. Paid search efforts which ignore the long tail are potentially missing out on a large chunk of revenue. The challenge of the long tail is that dealing with massive amounts of query data quickly becomes unmanageable.

Traditional Search Reports: head queries for some top travel sites

If you have hundreds of pages of unique queries to sort through manually, forming a actionable view of that data is a painful process. This is why most people only look at the first few pages of queries.

Categorizing Queries using Patterns

Finding frequent search patterns is the key to making search data understandable. Patterns let you to treat groups of long tail searches like popular individual queries.

Our concept of patterns is similar to an example described by Brian Brown in a recent SEOMoz post. Patterns are templates for searches that have a similar structure. For instance, the pattern “jobs in [x]” represents searches for jobs in some location. The “[x]” is a wildcard that can stand for one or more words. These “masked terms” are often variants of a similar concepts, like locations or celebrity names. Depending on the nature of your site, up to 80% of your long tail search traffic could be summarized using just the top 20 query patterns.

Concentrate Pattern Summary View for TripAdvisor.com

The next iteration of Concentrate’s learning algorithms will replace many of these wildcards with named entity labels. For example: “hotels in [x]” will become “hotels in [City]”. See our FAQ for more details on special pattern categories like navigational queries. Tomorrow, we'll cover the travel case study in detail.