Analytics Is Dead: Long Live User-Centric Analytics

Setting the standard for a new acronym from the start, IT Operations Analytics (ITOA) company Nexthink has launched its V5.3 offering.


This new release is hoped to help enterprise IT visibility by including Mac and mobile device end-user devices accessing the IT infrastructure, including BYOD units.

With these additions, the firm claims that it has produced the first “any device” end-user IT analytics platform.

Device consumption insights

According to Gartner, “By 2018, 50% of employees will be accessing enterprise data from devices for which there is currently no solution for enterprise management/visibility.”

Any Device Analytics is intended to show how how corporate IT resources are being consumed by end users… and if there are any problems such as security and compliance breaches.

Mobile Devices: View details about corporate owned and personal mobile devices (iOS, Android, Windows Phone, and Blackberry) that connect to an IT infrastructure. Verify mobile, security, and BYOD policies without having to install any software on the end-users’ device.

Exchange Policies: Analyze Microsoft Exchange ActiveSync mailbox polices, security settings, and identify approved, non-approved, blocked mobile devices, and those waiting for approval.

Better Smart Search: Enhanced “any device” smart search capabilities, including more suggested investigations related to security and probable-cause, enables IT to quickly answer questions about any end-user or device connecting to the IT infrastructure.

New Query Language and API: The new query language (NXQL) is a flexible and fully documented API that makes it easy for other systems to interface with Nexthink analytics data and realize integrations such as ITSM, CMDB, SIEM, and ITOA.

 “I’ve been using Nexthink since 2006,” said Patrick Siggen, chief information security officer at Etat du Valais. “What has me really excited about V5.3 is the ability to see in one visualization all the end-users and devices that are using our IT services. The new Mac and mobile device support enables me to verify that our security policies are working, as well as identify potential threats that otherwise could go undiscovered.”

Nexthink CEO Pedro Bados says that this product is the next step in his long-term vision to revolutionize IT with a user-centric IT analytics approach to make better decisions and prove business value.

About Adrian Bridgwater

Adrian Bridgwater is a freelance journalist specialising in cross platform software application development and data analytics as well as all related aspects of software engineering and project management.   Adrian is a regular writer and blogger with Computer Weekly, Forbes, The Register and others. His journalistic creed is to bring forward-thinking, impartial, technology editorial to a professional (and hobbyist) technology audience around the world. His mission is to objectively inform, educate and challenge.
This entry was posted in ITSM. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to Analytics Is Dead: Long Live User-Centric Analytics

  1. Monzour says:

    above: the “fault” lies not with the tool but the workman.ITIL is only wrong, ouetatdd, bureaucratic, etc, etc if you suspend all rational thought and believe for one iota that it is possible to write down the answer to everything. Douglas Adams had the solution – 42! And that is just as useful as putting one’s faith in ITIL as the answer to everything. Perhaps “faith” is an apt word, because some people do treat it as a religion. For a while a called myself an “evangelist” because that is what someone accused me of being after a presentation, having totally misunderstood or not listened to a word I said. Having reminded him that my whole message was about service management & that I had mentioned ITIL only 4 times in the 40 minutes and 2 of the references were warnings about its limitation, I said categorically that I was not an “ITIL fundamentalist”, but if by evangelist he meant someone speaking passionately about a subject that they believe is important, then I was happy to be called a “service management evangelist”.We must remain focused on the outcomes that we are seeking, not the mechanisms that are used to achieve it.If the enterprise needs rapid changes with little bureaucracy to inhibit them, then that’s a business choice – as long as there is also an acceptance (preferably documented) that this approach will certainly carry higher risk and may lead to heavy costs if something goes awry.If the enterprise is happy for people to ask for help & support from any source, then fine, allow it – as long as there is acceptance of the fact that different people might give conflicting advice, it is probably less trustworthy, has an inherent risk and again may lead to extra costs down the line.Everything depends upon the requirements of the enterprise and each one will be unique – and the requirements of each will change in different ways and at different speeds form any given point in time.In my humble opinion, “Castle ITIL” (as my kiwi mate the IT Skeptic calls them) bears a lot of responsibility for the issues facing us. Cabinet Office may well own the brand & the copyright on the words/diagrams, but I am extremely sceptical (English spelling!) that they (as an enterprise in a business sense) actually understand service management & how ITIL fits in the jigsaw. They didn’t produce the intellectual content and view it as a solution not a means to assist enterprises towards achieving one.The official accreditor has a remit that is focused on ITIL – after all that’s all Cab Office can give them; they are purely commercially focused – which means sell as many exams that are as cheap as possible for them to manage; which in turn means multiple guess tests.This then actively encourages organisations to offer “training courses” that are almost totally fixated on getting people thru the multi-guess tests to the detriment of educating them in the nuances and complexities of service management. I answer “ask the expert” questions on a forum and am staggered by the depth of ignorance displayed in some of the queries from people who have sundry “bits of paper” but clear not a shred of understanding of the basic principles and philosophy of service management.Enterprises lazily enter into contracts for products and services sprinkling the tender documents with ITIL references without understanding what they really want in the belief that somehow the magic 4 letter incantation will make everything right. (IT WON’T!) But who can blame the vendors for developing solutions that, at least on paper, embrace ITIL at their core – and having done so, have every reason to use this to promote their offering and well as becoming another group with a vested interest.Over the years, I have heard people criticising ITIL for what it includes; what it doesn’t include; its amount of detail; its lack of detail; its wooliness and lack of prescription; its rigid and bureaucratic approach; etc, etc. In other words, someone will always find fault because they themselves come to the subject with their own pre-conceived ideas, sometimes with their own agenda and vested interests to protect/promote, or just because they are trying to stir up trouble/debate. (YOU CAN’T PLEASE ALL OF THE PEOPLE ALL OF THE TIME!)Just as service management is an enormous and complex beast, so are the issues raised by this thread. Getting us back onto track requires an enormous effort from a range of stakeholders – but some of them are as likely to evolve as the dinosaurs were.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *