It is in the initial planning state of the Customer MDM and data governance where executive involvement is most critical in order to establish the basic assumptions about ownership roles. As previously mentioned, often there is an existing executive role and organization that is already a strong advocate and well suited to drive the Customer MDM initiative and its ongoing practice. But assuming or suggesting this person will be the owner of customer data may be controversial and not at all practical. Why start a political battle that's not necessary? The point here is that in a cross-functional Customer MDM initiative, data ownership is not typically an autonomous role. If within a company there is a business climate and model that lends well to having the Customer MDM initiative and data owned by one organization, that's fine, too, but often this will not be the case because of the segmented nature of the business practices.
MDM with Segmented Business Practices
Although MDM is about the discipline and control of master data and its associated processes, this does not imply that create, update, and delete responsibilities for much of the data itself should be the responsibility of one central group. This would not be practical because in a typical business model the process flow and life cycle of customer data will involve various segments of the business. As noted previously, customer data typically consists of data attributes that originate from the various source systems and transactional processes that various LOBs own and manage. For example, the customer master data will likely have various entry points or touch points from Customer Relationship Management (CRM), Quoting, Order Management, Accounts Receivable, Finance, Services, Marketing, Partner Management, and possibly other functional process areas across a company. The LOB executives that oversee these functional areas need to be partners in the MDM model, buy into all expectations, and view the MDM initiative as an enabling proposition, not a disruptive one.
This partnership also implies that the executives must fully define and accept the concepts of shared data and master data. This means:
- They can't hoard data that needs to be shared in order to create a broader view of the customer.
- For the data attributes defined as master data elements that originate from their systems or processes, they are responsible to maintain these in accordance to governance policies and data quality standards.
A Customer MDM initiative is doomed to fail if it does not have broad and clear support. A healthy heartbeat of MDM is dependent on the successful reconciliation of data, standards, policies, and quality control—all of which can penetrate deeply into the business model. Executives, along with their functional directors and managers, are all accountable in the MDM scope. The executive driver for the Customer MDM initiative also needs to be recognized as the MDM program owner. That is, this executive should be responsible for establishing and overseeing the MDM program and processes associated with planning and strategy, budget management, team engagement, and the fundamental disciplines of Data Governance, Data Stewardship, Data Quality Management, Data Access Management, which will be covered more in the subsequent chapters.
A Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approach
By embracing the concept that an MDM initiative can be centrally managed along with having segmented data ownership, it should be easy to understand how the concept of top-down and bottom-up data management can come together in a very effective manner, as noted in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Example of Top-Down and Bottom-Up Customer MDM
The organization that drives the MDM model is less important than the organization's commitment and ability to establish a broadly serving MDM program and cross-functional governance process that enables appropriate authority and influence across the model. This is where the buy-in from the LOBs and the overall MDM partnerships begins.
As this dynamic moves into place, and once the initial strategic direction, priorities, and the governance framework have been firmly established, the emphasis starts shifting to the tactical management of governance and the MDM operating processes. At this point, the priorities become more focused on the ability of the program to facilitate data stewardship and drive a maintenance-driven model that allows for the various functional areas to still maintain the necessary levels of engagement, responsibility, and control of their specific process and data areas, while also staying in line with governance policies, standards, and expectations associated with the Customer MDM practice. Ultimately, it is the management of all of these dynamics that drives a successful MDM practice based on collaborative partnerships.