Quick multi-topic post

It's been a busy few weeks what with InterACT, travel in Europe and then getting back on the right time zone and working on the book. So, to satisfy your hunger for a post, here are a few interesting links:

• Should Business Rules Be Technology Neutral?
  Interesting post about whether or not to include technology terms in rules. I think there is both value to capturing rules explicitly (instead of mixing them in requirements) and of automating them using a technology that allows the business to participate. In the first case I think you are trying to capture how the business thinks, in the second you must apply some kind of technology underpinning (so as to link the rules to real systems). You can hide some of the complexity but, as you say, some complexity must show through. Business users should be able to read these more technical rules, but you will need to do some work to get them to "own" them.
• A Tipping Point Prediction: More Predictive Analytics
  An interesting little piece on the potential growth of predictive analytics and data mining as tools get more accessible. While I agree with Michael's comments on always staying focused on the business value of analytics, I think he overstates the extent to which business users will build models and embed them. I think business users are going to use applications that embed predictive analytic models but I think experts will be building those models for some time to come. I posted before about an interesting TDWI survey on predictive analytics.
• Esurance–Competing on Analytics
  Short interview by my friends at Juice with someone from Esurance. Made me wonder how this kind of general analytics mesh with Esurance's risk modeling and other forms of predictive analytics? Same group, same process or something different? I blogged about the Tom Davenport book they reference here.

Enjoy. Sorry I was gone.

Technorati Tags: analytical competitor, analytics, BRMS, business rules, competing on analytics, Juice, predictive analytics