I enjoy hearing the terms that so often describe the data governance discipline, especially those that represent unity and harmony. Words such as;
Collaboration, Cooperation, Joint ownership, Consensus, Partnership, Group effort, Teamwork, Alliance, Ambassador, Facilitation
I myself have used many of these terms because we all know that success in data governance requires strong cross-functional participation. What I don’t see and hear enough of are words such as authority and accountability.
Why? One reason may be because many organizations choose to build their data governance programs solely on the principle of collaboration rather than institutional authority. Ideally, you really need a good balance of both to make it work, but many companies are currently falling short on the balance thing.
Companies that error on the far side of collaboration and consensus are struggling to secure, implement, and keep control over fundamental areas of data governance essential to developing and implementing standards for data models, quality, business rules, process, etc. Yes, these overly collaborative and typically project based models can drive small incremental progress but are falling short of overall expectations. They are also more likely to fall apart over the course of time.
On the other hand, companies that invoke more institutional authority over data management are starting to see accelerated levels of success. By no means am I suggesting a highly autocratic bureaucracy, however I do endorse a model that clearly defines roles, responsibilities, ownership, authority, and accountability. In addition, one that provides for quick and effective issue resolution at a tactical, strategic, and political level.
So I ask the question, is your data governance program heavy on collaboration or institutional authority? Is it helping or hurting you? Where does it need to be? What do you need to do to get there?
Share your thoughts, as this is a critical subject for your company's future.