|
Master Data Management: Consensus-Driven Data Definitions for Cross-Application Consistency (Report Excerpt)
Many data-management professionals and their business counterparts are asking: "What is master data management? Why should I care? Why is it imperative now?" This report seeks to answer these and
related questions.
Overview of Master Data Management
For many people in IT, this decade is all about integration. It’s about integrating customer data, integrating application silos, integrating data for BI purposes, integrating with partners, integrating with governments, and integrating through new interfaces like Web services. As if the list weren’t long enough, the practice known as master data management (MDM) has become a candidate for even more integration work. Hence, a lot of data-management professionals and their business counterparts are asking: “What is master data management? Why should I care? Why is it imperative now?” This report seeks to answer these and related questions. What Is Master Data Management?We need to build up to an answer to this question by describing (in procedural order) the technical components and best practices that are subsets of master data management:
MDM Solution Types. MDM solutions in most organizations are built into or closely associated with a larger application, though some span multiple applications. Due to these associations, MDM solutions fall into three broad categories (see Figure 1):
Figure 1. MDM solutions can be upstream or downstream relative to the flow of data. Why Should We Care about Master Data Management?The main reason that technical and business people should care about MDM is the long list of problems that occur when it’s ignored. Somewhat less compelling is the short list of benefits that come from improving master data and its integration across IT systems. The Problems of Poor Master Data. In an Internet-based survey that TDWI ran in mid-2006, a whopping 83% of respondents reported that their organizations have suffered problems due to poor master data. (See Figure 2.) Hence, the vast majority of users attests that MDM problems are real, numerous, and severe.
Figure 2. Based on 741 respondents. Poor-quality master data creates problems mostly within data warehousing and BI—but also outside it. (See Figure 3.) The top three problems relate directly to data warehousing, namely inaccurate reporting (81%), arguments over which data is appropriate (78%), and bad decisions based on incorrect definitions (54%). Others are general data management problems that sometimes impact data warehousing, like data governance and stewardship limitations (53%), limited visibility for data lineage (52%), and no understanding of master data homonyms (46%). Other problems cited by survey participants are business problems, like poor customer service (35%), inefficient marketing (32%) or purchasing (18%), and new products delayed (17%).
Figure 3. Based on 2,921 responses from 615 respondents. The Benefits of High-Quality Data. Though a vast majority of users have suffered problems from poor master data, a much slimmer majority (54%) claims to have derived benefits from good master data. (See Figure 4.) Still, this indicates that benefits are possible and can be identified.
Figure 4. Based on 741 respondents. As with master data problems, the benefits likewise relate most strongly to data warehousing and related data management practices, followed by general business issues. (See Figure 5.) Near the top of the list are data warehousing and BI issues, like accurate reporting (75%), better decision making (69%), and easier auditing of information’s origins (47%). Mixed with these are general data management issues, like data quality (76%), consistent definitions (65%), and data governance (39%). Low-ranked benefits are mostly general business issues, like risk reduction (33%), superior customer service (21%), and supply chain optimization (15%).
Figure 5. Based on 2,224 responses from 402 respondents. Good MDM Yields Good Reports. Users can clearly see the impact of MDM—both negative and positive—on visible products of information management, especially reports of various types. For example, in TDWI’s survey, inaccurate reporting is the leading problem and accurate reporting is the second leading benefit. The survey aside, most of the users that TDWI interviewed pointed to reports as an area where both technical and business people seek improvement via MDM. Though all reports may benefit from improved MDM, regulatory and financial reports are a hot spot, because they are scrutinized carefully today and can result in dire consequences when discrepancies are found. In fact, many interviewees admitted that they and their peers live in fear of an audit, and that they feel MDM can help them avert or prepare for such an event. For example, the consistently applied definitions of MDM ensure that reports are populated with correct data, and the data lineage of MDM answers questions in the event of an audit. Similar concerns are seen in the survey, where roughly half of respondents reported “limited visibility for data lineage” as a problem and “easier auditing of information’s origins” as a benefit. Despite its negative impetus, “audit paranoia” is a significant driver for increased efforts in master data management, as well as related areas like data quality, data warehousing, and report design. Why Is Master Data Management Imperative Now?Trends unique to this first decade of the new millennium have brought MDM to the forefront:
To download the full report, visit www.tdwi.org/research/reportseries. Recent articles by Philip Russom
Philip Russom -
Philip Russom is the Senior Manager of Research and Services at The Data Warehousing Institute (TDWI), where he oversees many of TDWI's research-oriented publications, services, and events. Prior to joining TDWI in 2005, Russom was an industry analyst covering BI at Forrester Research, Giga Information Group, and Hurwitz Group, as well as a contributing editor with Intelligent Enterprise and DM Review magazines. |