The Information Utility Index
Not all information creates value — and more of it usually doesn’t.
Modern organizations drown in information.
Dashboards multiply.
Notifications stack.
Tools generate endless artifacts.
And AI adds a new firehose on top of the old ones.
The problem isn’t the volume of information.
The problem is that we treat all information as if it were equally useful.
It isn’t.
Most information doesn’t improve decisions.
Most information doesn’t improve understanding.
Most information doesn’t improve outcomes.
It is entirely possible — and increasingly common —
to have more information and worse judgment.
The Information Utility Index exists for a simple reason:
If we don’t understand the usefulness of information,
we can’t manage it.
The Two Axes That Matter
The Information Utility Index is built on two simple dimensions:
1. Accuracy
Is the information correct?
2. Usefulness
Does the information help you:
make a decision?
understand a situation?
resolve a tradeoff?
reduce uncertainty?
take meaningful action?
Accuracy is objective.
Usefulness is contextual.
Great information lives where those two dimensions intersect.
Everything else is noise.
The Index produces four quadrants:
Accurate + Useful
Accurate + Useless
Inaccurate + Useful
Inaccurate + Useless
This simple model explains almost every information failure in modern organizations.
Quadrant 1:
Accurate + Useful
The gold standard of information.
This is the information that:
improves decisions
reduces risk
clarifies tradeoffs
resolves ambiguity
advances outcomes
You don’t need much of it.
This kind of information is rare and precious.
Unfortunately, modern organizations produce far less of this than they believe.
Quadrant 2:
Accurate + Useless
The hidden cost center of the modern workplace.
This is the majority of dashboards, updates, reports, and notifications.
It’s not wrong.
It’s just irrelevant.
Examples:
an accurate weekly report no one uses
a dashboard with metrics that don’t affect decisions
a detailed update that changes nothing
a perfectly synced system with no corresponding meaning
an AI summary of a meeting where nothing was decided
This quadrant gives the illusion of control.
It clutters minds, systems, and calendars.
Accurate + Useless is the enemy of focus.
It’s expensive.
It’s distracting.
And it is responsible for much of the cognitive overload modern teams experience.
Quadrant 3:
Inaccurate + Useful
The quadrant people are afraid to admit exists — but it often saves the day.
This includes:
rough estimates
gut intuition
back-of-the-envelope calculations
quick triage assessments
early signals
partial truths
imperfect models that still guide good action
This quadrant is uncomfortable in data-obsessed cultures.
But it matters because:
Action often depends on incomplete information.
Not everything needs to be precise to be valuable.
Sometimes “directionally correct” is far more useful than “precisely irrelevant.”
Organizations that outlaw this quadrant become slow, rigid, and blind.
Quadrant 4:
Inaccurate + Useless
The quadrant where meaning goes to die.
This includes:
outdated documentation
conflicting metrics
misinterpreted data
wrong dashboards
AI hallucinations
stale assumptions
reports built on obsolete logic
inherited “truths” no one questions anymore
This is the quadrant that silently corrodes decision-making.
But the real danger isn’t that Quadrant 4 exists.
It’s that organizations cannot tell the difference between Quadrant 1 and Quadrant 4 when context is missing.
This is the core problem of the modern workplace:
context determines utility, but context is the thing we lose fastest.
Why the Index Matters Now
In the industrial era, these distinctions didn’t matter as much.
Information was scarce.
Context was shared.
People were close enough to reconstruct meaning when the data fell short.
Now:
information is infinite
context is fragmented
meaning decays quickly
tools sync data but not interpretation
AI accelerates volume but not understanding
Without a shared model of utility, organizations drown in:
accurate noise
irrelevant detail
misaligned dashboards
ritualized reporting
information theater
People believe they need more information.
In reality, they need less information with higher utility.
The Index Exposes Organizational Blind Spots
Most organizations overvalue:
accuracy
volume
completeness
precision
reporting
visibility
And undervalue:
usefulness
meaning
interpretation
tradeoffs
constraints
assumptions
context
The Information Utility Index forces teams to confront that imbalance.
It reframes the core question from:
“Do we have information?”
to
“Does this information matter?”
That shift alone improves decision quality.
Why Tools and AI Make This Problem Worse
Tools increase the volume of information.
AI increases it faster.
Tools assume information has inherent value.
AI assumes information is infinitely reproducible.
Neither system understands that:
usefulness is contextual
and accuracy is not the same as insight.
AI can generate:
accurate summaries of useless meetings
irrelevant analysis delivered with confidence
perfectly formatted noise
information without interpretation
Without a model of utility, AI simply accelerates the problem.
The index isn’t just a diagnostic tool for humans —
it’s an integration layer for using AI responsibly.
How Organizations Use the Index
The Information Utility Index helps teams:
1. Stop producing useless information
No more reports created out of habit.
2. Design dashboards that support real decisions
Not vanity metrics.
3. Align around what information matters
Shared definition reduces friction.
4. Create clarity during cross-functional work
Context determines utility.
5. Give AI the constraints it lacks
Without them, AI produces “accurate noise.”
6. Reduce cognitive load
Less volume, more meaning.
7. Improve speed without sacrificing judgment
Because the right information accelerates decisions.
The wrong information multiplies chaos.
The Line That Matters
Not all information is equal.
Not all accuracy is valuable.
Not all reporting is helpful.
The Information Utility Index exposes the truth:
Most of what we call “information” is not useful.
And most of what is useful is not documented.
The organizations that thrive in the context era will be the ones that:
reduce irrelevant information
elevate meaningful information
build systems that preserve context
teach people (and AI) to know the difference
Better information doesn’t come from more data.
It comes from understanding which information has utility
and which information has weight.
If this feels right, I’ll continue with Cornerstone Piece #5: The Corporate Cognitive Capacity Crisis — tying all four pieces together into a coherent arc.