What information does he need? What information do we need

New technologies are data-processing devices intended primarily for the individual user. But when we talk about information, we're mostly talking about enterprise information—at least that was the case in the previous part of this chapter. However, no less important role is played by the information necessary for the work of management - moreover, all employees mental labor. After all, for knowledge workers, for management in particular, information is a key resource. Information connects employees with each other and with the organization as a whole. In other words, it is information that enables knowledge workers to do their job.
But it is already clear today that no one but themselves can provide knowledge workers and management with the information they need. Unfortunately, few managers think about what kind of information they need, let alone develop the principles of its organization, and there can be no question. Management prefers to shift this work to those who supply them with information - to specialists in information technology and accountants. But data providers do not always know what data the user needs, what data will become for him not just information, but information. Only the knowledge worker himself and only the manager himself are able to turn disparate data into information. And only the knowledge worker himself, and especially the manager, can decide how to organize this information in such a way that it becomes the key to effective action.
To obtain the necessary information, the manager must first find answers to two sets of questions. What information should I provide to employees I work with and depend on? In what form? And at what time?
What information do I personally need? From whom? In what form? And at what time?
These two groups of questions are closely related. However, they are quite different. The question "What should I?" comes first because it forms the paradigm of information exchange. And as long as it is not installed, there will be no reverse flow of information from employees to the manager.
We have known this since Chester Barnard (1886-1961) published his (and still current) book The Functions of the Executive in 1938. Despite the fact that management unanimously admired (and admires) this work, Barnard's ideas are almost never put into practice. True, Barnard paid little attention to information exchange, referring it to the sphere of human relations and personal life. However, information exchange can also be effective in the workplace if it concerns subjects that are not related to personal life. information exchange should be focused on common tasks and common problems, in other words, on the job.
Question: "To which employee do I need to provide information so that he can do his job?" - determines the focus of information exchange on common tasks and common work. This makes the exchange more efficient. Therefore, here (as in any case when we want to make relationships effective) we cannot start with the question: "What do I need and what do I want?" The first questions should be formulated as follows: "What should I do for others?" and "Who are these others?" Only after receiving answers to them, you can ask the following: "What information do I need? From whom? In what form? At what time?"
After thinking about these questions, the manager will quickly discover that his company's information system does not provide much information. Some information comes from the accounting department, but in most cases, in order for the manager to use it in his work, they must be rethought, presented in a different form and expressed in other indicators. Most of the information that a manager needs to work comes, as already mentioned, from the external environment. This information must be organized separately and supplied independently of the internal information system.
To the question: "What information should I provide? To whom? In what form?" - Only the person who will receive this information can give an answer. Therefore, if a manager wants to have the information necessary to perform the tasks facing him, he must first of all turn to the employees with whom he works, on whom he depends, in general, to everyone who, by the nature of his activity, needs to have the most complete information. But before you ask, you need to prepare for the fact that you will have to answer the questions of the opposite side. For the one to whom the leader turns with his questions can - and should - in turn ask: "What information do you need from me?" Therefore, the manager must first consider the answers to both questions, and then turn to employees with the question: "What information should I provide you with?"
Both questions are: "What should I?" and "What do I need?" - deceptively simple. But anyone who has ever asked them knows that answering them requires a lot of thought, experimentation, and hard work. In addition, the answers often change. Therefore, these questions should be asked regularly, approximately every one and a half years. In addition, they should be asked whenever there is a significant change, such as a change in the company's business theory, the nature of the inquirer's work or position, or a change in the work or positions of those to whom the question is addressed.
If the manager seriously thinks about these questions, he will soon understand what information he should provide and what information he needs. And then he will be able to start organizing both types of information.
ORGANIZATION OF INFORMATION
Unorganized information is just information. Only information that is organized in a certain way makes sense. However, depending on the form of organization, the same information may have different meanings. For different employees and for different purposes, the same information must be organized in different ways.
Here is just one example. Since Jack Welch took over General Electric in 1981, the company has created more material wealth than any other company in the world. One of the main factors behind this success was that General Electric organized the same information about the performance of each of its divisions differently for different purposes. The company retained the traditional annual financial and marketing reports as a way to evaluate the performance of its divisions. But to develop a strategy for the long term, the data from these reports was systematized differently: so that unexpected successes and failures, as well as events that do not fit into the framework of previously drawn up plans, were visible. A third way to organize the same data was to focus on efficiency innovation activities companies, - because it is this indicator that turns into main factor in determining the amount of incentive payments and remuneration to the general manager and management representatives of each individual unit. Finally, the same data was organized in a different way for the needs of departmental management and staff development. It was on this latter type of report that management subsequently relied when making decisions about the promotion of managers, especially when it came to top positions in the unit.
As far as I can tell from my own experience, no two leaders organize the same information in the same way. And rightly so: information should be systematized in a way that is convenient for the work of this manager. However, there are a number of fundamental methods for organizing information.
One of them is to highlight the key event and is determined by the question: "Which events (because usually we are talking about not one, but several events) most influenced the overall result of my work?" A key event may be related to technology (for example, success research project). It can be associated with people and their professional growth; with the offer of a new product or service to target consumers; attracting new consumers. Which event is considered a key event is usually determined personally by the leader. However, he must first discuss this issue with the employees on whom his work depends. Perhaps this is the most important principle that must be brought to the attention of all employees and management.
The second technique was developed on the basis modern theory probabilities; Incidentally, it is based on total quality management. Within the ordinary probability distribution, there is a distinction between normal deviation and exceptional events. As long as the deviations do not fall outside the usual probability distribution for a given type of event (for example, for a quality level in manufacturing process), no action is required. Data on such deviations are classified as information, not information. But exceptions that do not fit within the probability distribution are already information and require immediate action.
Another method of organizing information is based on the theory of the threshold phenomenon (effect) - a theory that underlies the philosophy of perception. The German physicist Gustav Fechner (1801-1887) was the first to understand that we begin to feel, for example, a pin prick, only after the sensation reaches a certain intensity, in other words, when it passes a certain threshold of perception (the so-called Weber-Fechner law. - Note ed.). Very many phenomena are subject to this law - in our situation we are talking, of course, not about phenomena, but about data, the volume of which must reach a certain value in order to overcome the threshold effect.
This theory applies to work and personal life; it allows you to organize information - about a wide variety of events - into information. When we talk about a recession in the economy, we are talking about a threshold effect: a decrease in sales and profit levels becomes a recession, in particular when it lasts longer than a certain period of time. Similarly, a disease acquires the character of an epidemic after a certain percentage of the diseased from a certain population is reached, i.e. after a certain threshold has been passed.
This concept is especially useful for organizing information about personal events. Events such as accidents, injuries, minor annoyances, etc. start to matter after their number exceeds a certain threshold. All this applies to the performance of the company's innovation activity, with the only difference: here we are talking about the threshold below which the fall in the performance of innovation becomes dangerous and requires urgent action. The concept of a threshold effect is also very useful for determining the moment after which a sequence of events turns into a trend, begins to require increased attention and, possibly, some action; or vice versa, to determine a situation in which events, even looking rather alarming at first glance, do not entail serious consequences.
Finally, many managers have found in practice that a very effective way to organize information is to collect information about everything unusual.
One example is a letter to a manager. Employees of the division write letters (informal reports) to one of the managers on a monthly basis, telling about everything unusual and unforeseen that happened in their area of activity during reporting period. Most of these facts can be completely forgotten. But there are "exceptional" events that fall outside the normal probability distribution. Sequences of events are constantly emerging, insignificant in the context of one line of activity, but acquiring great significance when combined with others. Each time, letters to managers reveal new developments that should be paid attention to. Each time they carry new information.
NO SURPRISES
None of the systems created by knowledge workers, and especially managers, to provide the information they need, can be (and never will be) perfect. But still, these systems are constantly improving. An indicator of the quality of the information system is the absence of surprises in the work of the company. In other words, management has time to learn about upcoming events, analyze them, understand them and take appropriate measures even before these events occur or become large-scale.
Here is one example: for only three or four - in general, for very few - US financial institutions did not come as a surprise economic crisis that broke out in the late 90s in Asian countries. These institutions promptly analyzed the "information" they received about the economic situation and the currencies of Asian countries. Gradually, they withdrew all the information provided by their own divisions and affiliates in these countries, because they realized that it was not information, but just information. Instead, they increased their collection of information on such subjects as the ratio between fixed and portfolio investment in these countries, the ratio between portfolio investment (for example, short-term loans) and the country's balance of payments, and the amount of money a country has at its disposal to service foreign short-term investments. debts. Long before these ratios became dangerous and pointed to the inevitability of troubling developments in Asian stock exchanges, the leaders of these financial institutions realized where everything was going. They realized "that they have to make a difficult decision: to leave these countries and guarantee short-term growth or stay for the implementation of long-term - and very risky - strategies. In other words, they have identified the really important economic data in time, managed to organize, analyze and correctly interpret them They turned information into information and developed priority measures long before they were really needed, and the vast majority of American, European and Asian companies doing business in the Asian mainland and / or investing capital in their enterprises relied only on that information. which were reported by their representatives in these countries. It turned out that this information cannot be called information at all - in any case, in fact, they turned out to be uniform disinformation. Only those leaders who had spent several years looking for answers to the question: "What kind of information can be considered tvenno and adequate when it comes to our business in Thailand or Indonesia?"
Too often just a large amount of data is mistaken for information. The difference between a large amount of data and information is about the same as between a phone book with millions of names and the name, place of work and address of the person you need. Management must learn two lessons: first, it is necessary to eliminate data that is not relevant to the desired topic; secondly, the data must be organized, analyzed, interpreted, and only then used to make a decision about actions. For we collect information not in order to accumulate knowledge, but in order to undertake right action.
GO TO THE WORLD
An example of companies from developed countries, for whom the Asian crisis came as a complete surprise, emphasizes the importance of obtaining essential information from the external environment.
The manager, ultimately, has only one way to do this: to enter this external environment himself. Even the most remarkable reports and the brilliant economic or financial theories underlying them cannot replace personal, direct observation, and in such a form that it is really external observation.
The British supermarket chain is again and again trying to gain a foothold in neighboring Ireland - almost without success. Super-Quinn is the leading supermarket chain in Ireland, founded and run by Fergal Quinn. The secret of his success is not in a wider range or low prices, but in the fact that he forces all the leaders of the company to spend two days a week not in their offices, but at the points of sale. Managers spend the first day in one of the Super-Quinn supermarkets, doing some work, such as checking receipts or monitoring the unloading of perishable products, the second day in competitors' stores: watching, listening, talking with employees and customers.
One of the founders of the largest medical equipment company in the United States spent his holidays (four weeks a year, twice fortnightly) behind the counter as a salesman. He demanded the same from the entire top management of the company. After these two weeks, an ordinary salesman returned behind the counter and listened to customers' complaints about his "colleague" for a long time. For example, a housekeeper from a Catholic hospital, buying medical preparations, was indignant: "What kind of dumbass worked here instead of you? All the time he asked why I buy goods from other companies, and not this one. I couldn’t even really take the order." Working with clients allows top management to get simply unique information about their products.
By the way, it has long been noticed that nothing has such a positive effect on the work of a doctor as turning him into a patient for a couple of weeks.
Marketing research, focused group interviews and so on - all this is very valuable and has a right to exist. But all of these types of research focus on the company's product. They never aim to find out what else the consumer buys and what other goods he is interested in. Get real information about external environment one way: to become a consumer, a seller, a patient, etc. But even such information is largely limited by the experience of consumers and non-consumers of one specific company. What is the other information about the external environment that management needs in its work? And how can he get it?
Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why volunteer work in non-profit organization- we will talk about this in Chapter 6 - is very important, not only in the sense that it allows you to better prepare for the second half of your life and career. It is no less important in terms of obtaining new information about the external environment - information about people, their work, lifestyle, their knowledge and value systems, views on certain problems, ways of making decisions and actions. For the same reason, an increasingly important role will play additional education for employees who already have one education. For in the course of obtaining such an education, a knowledge worker at the age of about 40-45 years old - be it a company manager, a lawyer, a university rector, a clergyman - communicates with new people who have a completely different lifestyle and a different value system. This is a great way not only to increase your level of knowledge, but also to get something that is always lacking for the superiors out of touch with life - information about the lives of other people.
Summarizing, we can say that information about the external environment is the most important information that management needs to work. At the same time, this is information that always requires systematization. This information is not only the foundation for making the right decisions. It is also the foundation for two of the tasks that the next two chapters address: improving knowledge worker productivity and managing one's own career. Both tasks can only be done by specialists who know what information they need in their work and what information they must provide to others, and who are constantly improving methods that turn the chaos of messy information about the world into organized information that is necessary for work.

But it is already clear today that no one but themselves can provide knowledge workers and management with the information they need. Unfortunately, few managers think about what kind of information they need, let alone develop the principles of its organization, and there can be no question. Management prefers to shift this work to those who supply them with information - information technology specialists and accountants. But data providers do not always know what data the user needs, what data will become for him not just information, but information. Only the knowledge worker himself and only the manager himself are able to turn disparate data into information. And only the knowledge worker himself, and especially the manager, can decide how to organize this information in such a way that it becomes the key to effective action.

To obtain the necessary information, the manager must first find answers to two sets of questions. What information should I provide to employees I work with and depend on? In what form? And at what time?

What information do I personally need? From whom? In what form? And at what time?

These two groups of questions are closely related. However, they are quite different. The question "What should I?" comes first because it forms the paradigm of information exchange. And as long as it is not installed, there will be no reverse flow of information from employees to the manager.

We have known this since Chester Barnard (1886-1961) published his (and still current) book The Functions of the Executive in 1938. Despite the fact that management unanimously admired (and admires) this work, Barnard's ideas are almost never put into practice. True, Barnard paid little attention to information exchange, referring it to the sphere of human relations and personal life. However, information exchange can also be effective in the workplace if it concerns subjects that are not related to personal life. Information exchange should be focused on common tasks and common problems, in other words, at work.

Question: "To which employee do I need to provide information so that he can do his job?" - determines the focus of information exchange on common tasks and common work. This makes the exchange more efficient. Therefore, here (as in any case when we want to make relationships effective) we cannot start with the question: "What do I need and what do I want?" The first questions should be formulated as follows: "What should I do for others?" and "Who are these others?" Only after receiving answers to them, you can ask the following: "What information do I need? From whom? In what form? At what time?"

After thinking about these questions, the manager will quickly discover that his company's information system does not provide much information. Some information comes from the accounting department, but in most cases, in order for the manager to use it in his work, they must be rethought, presented in a different form and expressed in other indicators. Most of the information that a manager needs to work comes, as already mentioned, from the external environment. This information must be organized separately and delivered independently from the internal information system.

To the question: "What information should I provide? To whom? In what form?" - Only the person who will receive this information can give an answer. Therefore, if a manager wants to have the information necessary to perform the tasks facing him, he must first of all turn to the employees with whom he works, on whom he depends, in general, to everyone who, by the nature of his activity, needs to have the most complete information. But before you ask, you need to prepare for the fact that you will have to answer the questions of the opposite side. For the one to whom the leader turns with his questions can - and should - in turn ask: "What information do you need from me?" Therefore, the manager must first consider the answers to both questions, and then turn to employees with the question: "What information should I provide you with?"

Both questions are: "What should I?" and "What do I need?" - deceptively simple. But anyone who has ever asked them knows that answering them requires a lot of thought, experimentation, and hard work. In addition, the answers often change. Therefore, these questions should be asked regularly, approximately every one and a half years. In addition, they should be asked whenever there is a significant change, such as a change in the company's business theory, the nature of the inquirer's work or position, or a change in the work or positions of those to whom the question is addressed.

If the manager seriously thinks about these questions, he will soon understand what information he should provide and what information he needs. And then he will be able to start organizing both types of information.

In the cost classification for management decisions the key place is occupied by the sign of the materiality of information, according to which the costs are divided into relevant and irrelevant. Relevant information is essential for decision making, i.e. it contains the data that should be taken into account when preparing information for managers. Irrelevant information includes irrelevant, redundant data. Information for management should contain the necessary, perceived and conscious information necessary for the analysis of specific situations, enabling a comprehensive assessment of the causes of its occurrence and development, allowing to determine a number of alternative solutions, from which it is realistic (based on a specific situation) to find the optimal management decision.

In the classification of costs for management decisions, the key place is occupied by the attribute materiality of information, according to which the costs are divided into relevant and irrelevant.

Relevant Information essential to the decision, i.e. it contains the data that should be taken into account when preparing information for managers. irrelevant information includes non-essential, redundant cost and revenue data. They can lead to two consequences:

making an erroneous decision due to the fact that the information picture describing the problem situation on which a decision should be made is distorted;
reducing the efficiency and increasing the complexity of the decision-making process, i.e. information is not distorted, but the manager receives unnecessary data that makes it difficult to think about the situation and increase the time to resolve it.

The first rule of relevance

Information for the manager should ensure the right decision . This is main characteristic the quality of information for the leader.

Consider examples of options for preparing information that lead to erroneous decisions.

Example 1 The head of the enterprise decides on the withdrawal from production of a product type. What data should he receive?

The company for the production of bakery products sells products through extensive network trade stalls within the demand for each item. After a sharp increase in prices for some additives, the director, based on intuition, assumes that some of the products have become unprofitable. He asks to analyze costs and revenues.

The accountant who was given this task presented revenue data by product for the period and all costs, i.e. he subtracted all manufacturing and selling costs to product costs to calculate the profit of each unit. The results of the calculations showed that bagels with poppy seeds were sold at a loss, and the manager removed them from production.

However, after this action, the company's profit decreased, since the decrease in revenue did not entail a proportional decrease in costs. Part of the fixed production and commercial costs remained the same. In this case, information on the share of the cost of renting stalls, the cost of maintaining a truck and wages direction attributable to bagels, was irrelevant. Her accountant should not have been included in the calculations submitted at the director's request.

Relevant in this situation are general indicators: variable costs, sales volume (revenue), marginal income.

Relevant may be unit costs and revenues: unit price, unit variable costs per unit, marginal income per unit of output.

The relevance of costs is well seen in the analysis of "past costs" arising from earlier decisions.

Example 2 You dream of a TV with certain characteristics (diagonal, configuration, etc.) and have saved half the amount for it. On the eve of the anniversary, friends and relatives, knowing about your desire, decided to add the missing amount. They certainly wanted to see TV on your birthday. The search for the ordered model did not give any results and you "gave the go-ahead" to purchase an analogue for 300 USD. After a short period of time (we abstract from consumer rights), you go to the store and see the TV of your dreams: exactly that diagonal, screen plane, setting! In addition, its cost is lower - 260 USD.

One of your colleagues, having learned about your regrets, offered to buy a TV set from you, but the amount that he had did not exceed 240 USD. What amount in arbitrary units is relevant for making a decision to buy a TV: 40, 60 or 20, or another?

To make a decision about purchasing a new TV, you should not worry about either 300 USD paid for the purchase or 40 USD. price difference. They are lost to you. These are the costs of past periods, and the past cannot be changed. When making a decision, you should only consider whether it is worth paying $20. for the desired characteristics of the TV.

The second rule of relevance

Information for the manager should be presented in a form convenient for perception and should not contain redundant data .

Example 1 The issue of opening a separate subdivision in Rostov is being resolved; obviously there will be additional costs. Information will be relevant only about additional costs and income. Sales and cost data for existing separate divisions would be redundant or irrelevant.

Example 2 Increases the relevance of information for management decisions alternative (conditional) costs. For example, an enterprise has unused steel stocks. At the beginning of the period, their balances amounted to 1,000 units. 110 rub. for 1 unit It turned out that there are many uses for steel. The company can sell them for 190 thousand rubles. or 90 rubles. for 1 unit, discard or produce 2 types of products.

Alternative options are discussed on how to make the most profitable use of stocks of steel castings: organize production, sell, discard.

Alternative costs transform the report so that it is immediately clear how profitable it is to produce this or that product than to sell it at the best of the alternatives, or vice versa (Table 1).

Table 1. Data for decision making (using opportunity costs)

Calculation algorithm:

the priority direction is discussed based on the enterprise development strategy;
the best of the selected options is selected;
taken as contingent costs and entered into the calculation of the profit for the best alternative;
it is calculated how much the discussed variant is better (worse) than the alternative one.

According to the table, it is more profitable for an enterprise to produce product A from steel than to sell it, for 70 thousand rubles; at the same time, it is more profitable to sell than to produce product B by 50 thousand rubles.

Thus, information for management should contain the necessary, perceived and conscious information necessary for the analysis of specific situations, enabling a comprehensive assessment of the causes of its occurrence and development, allowing to determine a number of alternative solutions, from which it is realistic (based on a specific situation) to find the optimal management decision. .

Information for managers, including all knowledge workers, for their own work, perhaps much more important than information for the enterprise. Information connects them more and more strongly with colleagues and with the organization itself, with their "network". In other words, it is information that enables knowledge workers to do their job.

It is now clear that no one can provide knowledge workers with the information they need, except themselves. But few managers have yet tried to figure out what they need, and even fewer have tried to figure out how to organize that information. Typically, managers rely on data producers (IT professionals and accountants) to provide them with this information. But data producers cannot themselves know what data users need and are able to turn into information. Only specific workers Knowledge workers are able to decide how to organize their information in a way that enables them to operate effectively.

To get the information they need to get the job done, managers must start by answering questions like these.

What information should I provide to the people I work with and depend on? In what form? In what period?
What information do I need? From whom? In what form? In what period?

These questions are closely related, but still different from each other. What should I go first, because the answer to this question allows you to start communication. Until communication is established, no information can get back to the manager.

We've known this since Chester E. Barnard (1886-1961) published his book The Function of the Executive back in 1938. And although Barnard's book received worldwide recognition, it had almost no effect on practice. For Barnard, communication was vague and general concept, a kind of phenomenon associated with relationships between people and deeply personal. But what makes communication effective in the workplace is the fact that it is aimed at something outside the person himself. Communication should focus on a common task and common purpose, at work.

By asking oneself, "Who do I need to give information to so that these people can do their job?", a person aims communication at common task and general work. Communication becomes effective. Therefore, the first question (as in any kind of effective relationship) is not "What do I want and what do I need?" but "What do other people need from me?" and "Who are these people?" Only then can one ask: "What information do I need? From whom? In what form? During what period?"

Managers asking these questions will soon realize that their information system own company they get very little information they need. Some comes from the accounting department, although often such data has to be rethought, reformulated and re-formulated so that the manager can apply them in work. However, a significant part of the information that is useful to the manager in his work, as already mentioned, comes from outside, and it must be organized completely separately from the internal information system.

The only one who can answer the questions "What information do I owe someone? To whom exactly? In what form?" - it's a different person. Therefore, the first step in getting the information managers need to do their job is to reach out to the people they work with, everyone they depend on, those who need to know what they are doing, and ask them. But first you need to prepare yourself for the answer. After all, the interlocutor will and should ask questions in turn: "What information do you need from me?" This means that managers must first consider both questions and only then approach other people with a request to tell what information they need to provide.

Both questions are "What should I?" and "What do I need?" - at first glance seem simple, but this is a delusion. Anyone who has ever asked them soon realizes that in order to find the right answer, you need to think carefully, do a lot of experiments and put a lot of effort. In addition, the answers received are not eternal, they have to be searched again and again, every year and a half. In addition, these same questions should be asked whenever major changes occur, such as changes in business theory in an enterprise, in the tasks or work of a particular person or many people.

However, if a person seriously asks these questions, he will soon learn to understand both what he needs and what he must provide to others, after which it will be possible to move on to organizing both types of information.

I'm trying to understand the logic by which our TV channels select reasons for news stories. I stopped thinking about radio a long time ago. I realized that there news is a spacer between music and advertising. "Echo" has ceased to listen since last summer. So, about TV news. I have several versions. I understand everything about brainwashing and propaganda, something else is interesting.

For example, the other day, the Vesti channel, without comment, shows snowdrifts in who the hell knows in which US state. People in baseball caps are walking, shivering, like it's very cold. Cars are stalling. Harvesting equipment does not cope with the happiness that has fallen on the head of unfortunate Americans. And so without a word for three or four minutes. What for? Come to any town in the Urals, even ours, and see what is happening on our streets, especially inside courtyards and quarters.

Further economic news, at least on the same Vesti, at least on NTV. When they tell you several times a day about the next expansion of the dual-currency basket and a slight weakening of the ruble, why? About the indexes "high-tech nasdaq" and "ESEN BP"? What does this information have to give a simple man in the street? Economists and traders won't know about these figures from a shit box, will they? Well, after all, RBC or Bloomberg exist for them.

There is either some deep meaning in this, which, alas, I can’t understand, or it’s just hack and not the desire to strain and think, but what people really want to hear is to see. It’s easier, I took a picture from a bourgeois channel and let it go "no comment". "Business" news can also be molded like pies and then repeated ten times a day. I planted a pretty girl, who reads smart phrases about options and futures from a teleprompter, launched a ticker with stock prices, and now the information product is ready, you can stuff it with advertising.

To be fair, I tried to imagine the ideal television that I would like to watch. Nothing comes to mind. I have already lost the habit of TV, the efficiency of this source of information is too low. So far I can’t tune in to Expert TV, although I don’t have much hope for it either. Perhaps in the future there will be interactive pay TV channels, where viewers will go on the air like video chats and communicate with the hosts with other viewers. This would be interesting to watch, and perhaps participate in. It's something like social network, in which it will be possible to communicate virtually, but in real time at a much higher speed.

This question worries me from a practical point of view. I myself constantly reflect on the expediency of this or that material in our publications. What information do I need? Data. Speaking of TV live coverage. Presenting information from different points of view. Expert opinion. The same facts, only passed through the experience and understanding of a specific authoritative person in this area. His picture of events and forecast of further development. In order for the image to be three-dimensional, three-dimensional information is needed. Contrasting points of view and bare facts.

I now evaluate all information on whether it helped me to improve my understanding, which in turn should help me to act more effectively. To understand, you need a counter question, you need to look for an answer to what worries you. Or at least be able to formulate, realize what does not suit you, shares with the ideal development of events. So you set traps for the right information.

It might be useful to read: