OCT 19, 2012 12:46pm ET

Related Links

Data Governance in Insurance Carriers
August 28, 2014
Data Governance: The Silent Hero to Achieving MDM Triumph
August 20, 2014
Six Rules to Improve Your Odds of Governance Success
August 14, 2014

Web Seminars

Why Data Virtualization Can Save the Data Warehouse
September 17, 2014
Essential Guide to Using Data Virtualization for Big Data Analytics
September 24, 2014
blog

Data Governance: Cost of Doing Business?

Print
Reprints
Email

In the past, we’ve looked at serious attention to data governance as a sign of data management maturity and success. And since it was on center stage with so much prioritized attention at our just-completed MDM & Data Governance Summit in New York, I have to ask the question:

Get access to this article and thousands more...

All Information Management articles are archived after 7 days. REGISTER NOW for unlimited access to all recently archived articles, as well as thousands of searchable stories. Registered Members also gain access to:

  • Full access to information-management.com including all searchable archived content
  • Exclusive E-Newsletters delivering the latest headlines to your inbox
  • Access to White Papers, Web Seminars, and Blog Discussions
  • Discounts to upcoming conferences & events
  • Uninterrupted access to all sponsored content, and MORE!

Already Registered?

Advertisement

Comments (2)
Maybe people are not clear on the term governance. I found there are two levels of governance. One is more operations centric and worries about hitting SLAs and KPIs of things like data quality, controls and compliance. The other (more tru governance) worries about how to handle change in data practices. For example what process to follow if data security was breached, how to establish a clean team or how to handle a merger from a data perspective. Governance of the second type often needs an execution arm, as day to day resources are busy. It is this hidden cost outside day to day operations that really gets to organizations, and establishing true governance change processes and capabilities is seen as one step too far. The basic "data governance" covered under an operating model is no longer an issue in my view. Most companies accept this. The strategic value of haven the change governance is largely undiscovered.
Posted by chris b | Monday, October 22 2012 at 11:47AM ET
We are making mountains out of mole hills. Should DG be a line item? Well, is auditing or marketing? Maybe in a budget. But on the 10K? Nope. The issue isn't a budgeted line item because like any other governance, at some point it needs to disappear, be woven into the day-to-day business processes. DG is to IM as audit is to finance. Anne is a sharp cookie and delivers results, but by way of explanation the statistic is misleading. A SME doing 30% DG? No way. Maybe doing 30% information management,which is what I think Anne meant, but IM is not DG. The person telling them how to lean up the file and the policies to apply is doing DG. The pundits keep mixing IM with DG. e.g. Someone cleaning up a file is doing DG. THEY ARENT. They are doing IM. The analysts owe it to their clients to educate more clearly, and not muddle up the view by mixing metaphors. Actually, maybe they need to actually look at a bunch of DG programs that work. You will see a distinct separation of DG and IM functions.
Posted by John L | Monday, October 22 2012 at 2:04PM ET
Add Your Comments:
You must be registered to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment. Click here to register.
Already registered? Log in here
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.
Twitter
Facebook
LinkedIn
Login  |  My Account  |  White Papers  |  Web Seminars  |  Events |  Newsletters |  eBooks
FOLLOW US
Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.