Data Governance Frameworks are like Jigsaw Puzzles
Jim Harris in Associations, Books, Data Quality, Methodology tagged Best of 2012, Data Governance, Data Quality Pro, Jill Dyché, Scott Berkun Tuesday, January 10, 2012 at 3:00AM 
In her recent Data Quality Pro Interview, Jill Dyché explained a common misconception, namely that a data governance framework is not a strategy. “Unlike other strategic initiatives that involve IT,” Jill explained, “data governance needs to be designed. The cultural factors, the workflow factors, the organizational structure, the ownership, the political factors, all need to be accounted for when you are designing a data governance roadmap.”
“People need a mental model, that is why everybody loves frameworks,” Jill continued. “But they are not enough and I think the mistake that people make is that once they see a framework, rather than understanding its relevance to their organization, they will just adapt it and plaster it up on the whiteboard and show executives without any kind of context. So they are already defeating the purpose of data governance, which is to make it work within the context of your business problems, not just have some kind of mental model that everybody can agree on, but is not really the basis for execution.”
“So it’s a really, really dangerous trend,” Jill cautioned, “that we see where people equate strategy with framework because strategy is really a series of collected actions that result in some execution — and that is exactly what data governance is.”
And in her excellent article Data Governance Next Practices: The 5 + 2 Model, Jill explained that data governance requires a deliberate design so that the entire organization can buy into a realistic execution plan, not just a sound bite. As usual, I agree with Jill, since, in my experience, many people expect a data governance framework to provide eureka-like moments of insight.
In The Myths of Innovation, Scott Berkun debunked the myth of the eureka moment using the metaphor of a jigsaw puzzle.
“When you put the last piece into place, is there anything special about that last piece or what you were wearing when you put it in?” Berkun asked. “The only reason that last piece is significant is because of the other pieces you’d already put into place. If you jumbled up the pieces a second time, any one of them could turn out to be the last, magical piece.”
“The magic feeling at the moment of insight, when the last piece falls into place,” Berkun explained, “is the reward for many hours (or years) of investment coming together. In comparison to the simple action of fitting the puzzle piece into place, we feel the larger collective payoff of hundreds of pieces’ worth of work.”
Perhaps the myth of the data governance framework could also be debunked using the metaphor of a jigsaw puzzle.
Data governance requires the coordination of a complex combination of a myriad of factors, including executive sponsorship, funding, decision rights, arbitration of conflicting priorities, policy definition, policy implementation, data quality remediation, data stewardship, business process optimization, technology enablement, change management — and many other puzzle pieces.
How could a data governance framework possibly predict how you will assemble the puzzle pieces? Or how the puzzle pieces will fit together within your unique corporate culture? Or which of the many aspects of data governance will turn out to be the last (or even the first) piece of the puzzle to fall into place in your organization? And, of course, there is truly no last piece of the puzzle, since data governance is an ongoing program because the business world constantly gets jumbled up by change.
So, data governance frameworks are useful, but only if you realize that data governance frameworks are like jigsaw puzzles.
Related Posts
Listen to Jill Dyché discuss Data Governance on the Knights of the Data Roundtable
The Three Most Important Letters in Data Governance
Data Governance and the Adjacent Possible
Aristotle, Data Governance, and Lead Rulers
Data Governance Star Wars: Balancing Bureaucracy And Agility
OCDQ Radio - Data Governance Star Wars
The Collaborative Culture of Data Governance
No Datum is an Island of Serendip
Are your Best Practices R.I.P.?
Reader Comments (10)
I agree (and like) the jigsaw puzzles metaphor. I would like to make an observation though:
Can you really construct Data Governance one piece at a time? I would argue you need to put sets of pieces simultaneously first, and to ensure early value, you might want to piece together the interesting / easy pieces first.
Hold on, that sounds like the typical jigsaw strategy anyway . . . :-)
Thanks for sharing the link to the interview Jim, much appreciated.
Jill mentioned that she frequently gets asked to just sell their Data Governance framework and they push back because of the very reasons you mention above. I think a great point she also raised, that kind of ties this in, is that people tend to bypass important steps when they get frameworks because it's often a short hop between getting a framework and enlisting execs.
By going down the design route to data governance you're guaranteeing greater change management, communication, grass-roots and mid-management buy-in etc. so that by the time you're ready to pitch the execs, you're building on a much firmer foundation.
Thanks again for adding your views to the debate, insightful as ever.
Hello Jim,
As usually, it's a delight to read you!
Your point is actually my current concern: how to make the managers aware of the value of the data?
As an operational team member, I experience everyday the lack of data quality. But how do I build a message to my managers? I recently discovered CoBIT (https://www.isaca.org) and its governance system. It seems to be structured based on the "information" concerns, but it is too much audit oriented.
I was also really interested by your post on You only get a Return from something you actually Invest in. I tried — unsuccessfully — to use it as a rationale for my own communication. But I am missing numbers and figures . . .
Could you recommend any book references about the value of data in order to fulfill this lack?
Thanks again for your regular interesting postings!
Kind regards,
Pierre
Thanks for your excellent comments, Gabriel, Dylan, and Pierre.
@Gabriel — Great point about constructing a data governance program with sets of pieces versus piece by piece. The jigsaw puzzle metaphor works well because, as anyone who has ever assembled at least one knows, there are many different ways to put the puzzle together, and during the intermediate stages you often have sets of pieces put together to reveal interesting patterns within the larger mosaic, which often helps people imagine what the completed puzzle will look like.
As you noted, this demonstrates early value and ensures sustained interest, both of which are essential to the long-term survival and, more importantly, success of the data governance program.
@Dylan — Yes, we are all advocates of searching for sound theories and working with proven methodologies, but the harsh reality is there is no “one theory to rule them all” or one-size-fits-all methodology. Data governance frameworks are useful because they include recommended best practices that proved successful for other organizations. However, as Jill explained, if an organization is looking to follow a step-by-step, paint-by-numbers, only color inside the lines, fool-proof plan, then they are going to fail before they even begin.
Best practices should be reviewed in order to determine what can be learned from them, as well as to select what an organization thinks will work in its environment and what simply won’t. However, it often won’t be easy to tell the difference. The key word in “best practice” is practice — and not best — as in the perfectly stupid phrase: “practice makes perfect.”
Real practice doesn’t make perfect. Real practice is messy. Real practice colors with the red crayon much more often than with the green crayon. Real practice doesn’t color inside the lines — it draws on the walls.
Not even best practices make perfect because nobody works at a company called Perfect, Incorporated. It’s only through trial and error that you figure out what works best for your organization, which then become your best practices.
@Pierre — Making managers aware of the value of data is the perennial struggle of all data management professionals. This was the question that I offered advice on in my recent video post Data Is as Data Does, which also included a list of recommended books. Of particular interest to your circumstances, might be my OCDQ Radio discussion with John Ladley about his book Making EIM Work for Business.
What we’re really talking about here is defining data governance. I recently did a quick movie for a Talend promotion to do just that. It turns out that defining data governance is trickier than you think: What is Data Governance? — A Talend Video
I think Jill’s point was that people are really looking for something that doesn’t exist — data governance in a box.
Thanks for your comment, Steve. Thanks also for sharing the link to your informative video.
“Data Governance in a Box” makes me think of the Jack in the Box restaurant chain and Homer Simpson:
Mmm . . . Data Governance in a Box . . .
Sadly, many organizations are driving around Springfield looking for the data governance drive-thru window . . . D’oh! :-)
Hi Jim,
Good article - I think that there are a number of more general lessons here. In particular the description of the issues with data governance sounds very like the issues with enterprise architecture.
In general there are very few eureka moments in solving the business and IT issues plaguing enterprises. These solutions are usually 10% inspiration, 90% perspiration in my experience. What looks like genius or a sudden breakthrough is usually the result of a lot of hard work.
I also think that there is a wider myth of the framework at play too. The myth is that if we just select the right framework then everything else will fall into place. In reality, the selection of the framework is just the start of the real work that produces the results. Frameworks don't solve your problems, people solve your problems by the application of brain-power and sweat. All frameworks do is take care of some of the "heavy-lifting" the mundane foundational research and thinking activity that is not specific to your situation.
Unfortunately the myth of the framework is why many organisations think that choosing TOGAF will immediately solve their IT issues and are then disappointed when this doesn't happen, when a more sensible approach might have garnered better long term success.
Cheers,
Doug
Thanks for your insightful (as always) comment, Doug.
I couldn’t agree more with your excellent remark:
“The selection of the framework is just the start of the real work that produces the results. Frameworks don’t solve your problems, people solve your problems by the application of brain-power and sweat.”
Cheers,
Jim
From the LinkedIn Group for the IAIDQ Professional Open Community, Stijn Christiaens commented:
“Constructing a puzzle from just the pieces is not easy, it helps if you can look at the box, and starting identifying patterns.
Jim - where would you recommend getting the puzzle overview in your metaphor?”
And I responded:
Thanks for your comment/question, Stijn.
Yes, looking at the box is essential to understanding what the jigsaw puzzle, and its constituent patterns, look like. However, this is exactly where not just the metaphor, but also actual data governance frameworks, often run into trouble, since it’s a slippery slope from there to thinking that data governance is as simple as just putting these pieces together in these identified patterns in this particular order and then you will have a data governance program.
Data governance frameworks are useful because they include recommended practices that proved successful for other organizations. These practices should be reviewed in order to determine what can be learned from them, as well as to select what your organization thinks will work in your environment and what simply won’t.
Unlike an actual jigsaw puzzle, you might not use all of the pieces, and some of pieces might not fit together in the way shown on the box. Unlike an actual jigsaw puzzle, you usually end up assembling your own unique patterns, which are the ones that fit best into the unique corporate culture of your organization.
Best Regards,
Jim
From the LinkedIn Group for Data Governance & Data Quality, John Adler commented:
“Great work Jim, thanks! This is one area that organizational/technical/business tactics are key.
The biggest challenge is getting from maturity level 0 to level 1 - puzzle analogy: corners and edges first. Developing repeatable and proven approaches that are tailored to each company's unique situation is the thing that makes establishing Data Governance so challenging (and fun). This is a cross discipline activity that requires Business, Organizational, Intrapreneurial, Technical, and Interpersonal smarts. A tall order indeed.”
And I responded:
Thanks for your great comment, John.
Corners and edges first, indeed. And, as you noted, each company's unique situation will determine where those corners and edges will be as the data governance journey begins.
Best Regards,
Jim