Article
Disaster! Messy Data, Misinterpretations, and Nonsensical Actions
I have a peculiar relationship with messy data. On one hand, it can drive me mad – there are times when I explode like a volcano after realising that decisions were made incorrectly because of it. Especially when it’s been going on for a long time and has had a significant negative impact. And particularly when I realise that I could have identified the issue much earlier. On the other hand, resolving such situations pulls me into a state of flow – a state where I immerse myself deeply into the problem and shut out the outside world.
I’ve realised that I’d probably be bored in a place where everything is perfectly organised, all information is accurate, everyone knows precisely what the data tells us, and everyone can place it into the broader context of the organisation.
One example of such a place is an overly simple organism. In the past, when I was approached with a job offer from one of the most renowned Slovak e-commerce projects, I wasn’t interested in changing jobs. But at the same time, I asked myself: what could I significantly contribute there? It’s just too simple a business – they buy and sell, buy and sell. It didn’t excite me at all. I saw no intellectual adventure in it, no opportunity to dive into entirely new situations and learn something new while solving them.
My place is elsewhere – in the jungle. Somewhere that at first glance seems chaotic and impossible to navigate. A place where most people only know their specific area of expertise. And that’s when the work becomes enjoyable for me. That’s when half a day flies by like half an hour.
This “jungle” can look very different depending on the situation. I don’t want to go into specifics; I’ll keep it general, though I realise that might make it less clear for the reader. It starts with it being one of those more complex organisms. And in such an organism, you might encounter four types of challenges related to working with information and the disasters that can arise from them.
Join the Library
Full access to my thoughts, personal stories, findings, and what I learn from the people I meet.
Join the Library — €29.99 per yearGet the full article by email and feel free to reply if you want to discuss it further.
Summary
Common questions on this article's topic
What are the main types of data quality problems in organisations?
Why is data misinterpretation more dangerous than missing data?
What does it mean to act on data without context?
How does flow state relate to solving complex data problems?
Why do some people thrive in messy data environments?
How can organisations reduce the risk of data-driven disasters?
If you have any thoughts, questions, or feedback, feel free to drop me a message at mail@richardgolian.com.
Related articles
This project changed the way I think about generative AI.
He used words like “certainty” as if statistics were part of Newtonian physics.
This is a serious issue, and it is high time we start acting responsibly.
More articles
Prague, 13 May 2026. On my way to work I started thinking about something that stayed with me for days. If most routine work on a computer disappears in the next ten years, and a large share of repetitive manual work disappears with it, what happens to the flow of money? Who pays whom for what? Which economic layers will exist, how large will they be, and what relationships will run between them? This is the six-layer map I sketched as an answer.
I am building an AI system to predict the S&P 500. It runs on my own machine, uses free public data — yfinance, FRED, the Shiller dataset — and grades every forecast against reality. This series documents the build itself: the decisions, the methodology, the mistakes. What I will eventually share from the running system is a separate question, and an honest one.
Yesterday I could not tear myself away from the computer. When I lifted my head, it was half past eight in the evening. I had been sitting alone upstairs for about three hours.
Will AI take my job? A certified Google trainer told me in June 2024 that my profession would cease to exist. Twenty-two months later, my job title has not changed — but ninety percent of what I do during the day is different. I have delegated more of my thinking to AI agents than I thought possible. I am not afraid. This is why, and what it means for anyone asking the same question.
One hour. Fifty-five minutes. That is how long it took to build what a Czech software firm had quoted at over €50,000. I built it with Claude Code. Not a prototype. Not a proof of concept. A working tool — the one the company actually needed. By the evening of the same day, it was running on staging. This is not about Claude Code. It is about what Claude Code exposes.
I have conducted roughly one hundred and fifty practical interviews over the past four years. Fifty for data specialist roles. A hundred for advertising and performance marketing specialists. Almost every one of them involved sitting down with a candidate over a practical task — something close to a real problem we actually need to solve at the company. Not theory. Not trivia. Applied problem-solving. Over time, I started noticing a pattern.
Before you can teach AI to understand anything, you need to see what it is hiding from you.
The moment other people needed access to it, the problem changed completely. It was no longer about whether the agent could learn. It was about who gets to teach it.
I wanted to build an agent that doesn't just assist. One that acts.
This is what I learned about local vs cloud AI, and why I switched to Claude Code.
Four days in Catalonia. No computer, no AI, almost no social media. I bought this notebook so that I could write down what I would think about, and what I would come across and learn on the trip.