Professional Documents
Culture Documents
GDSN Data Quality Framework
GDSN Data Quality Framework
Document Summary
Document Item Current Value
Document Title Data Quality Framework Including the Data Quality Protocol
Date Last Modified January 2008
Current Document Issue Issue 2
Status Approved
Document Description
Contributors
This framework has been written with the input from many retailers, manufacturers, industry associations,
certification bodies and others. The Joint Business Planning Group wishes to thank the following people for
providing support, guidance and invaluable input to this report:
■ Bud Babcock, The Procter & Gamble Company
■ Nigel Bagley, Unilever
■ Paul Bokdam, Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance
■ Hugo Byrnes, HBA Consultants
■ Hein Gorter de Vries, GS1 the Netherlands
■ Chris Havenga, GS1 South Africa
■ Sally Herbert, GDSN Inc. (for GS1)
■ Peter Irish, SCA
■ Sharon Jeske, CIES – The Food Business Forum
■ Peter Jordan, Kraft Foods
■ Kathleen van Maele, SCA
■ Thierry Morizur, Carrefour
■ Paul Povey, The Procter & Gamble Company
■ Abdul Razak, Campbell Soup Company
■ Katrin Recke, European Brands Association (AIM) /ECR Europe
■ Sabine Ritter, Global Commerce Initiative (GCI)
■ Alistair Robinson, Tesco
■ Alan Sargeant, The Procter & Gamble Company
■ Adrian Segens, GS1 UK
■ Pam Stegeman, Grocery Manufacturers Association of America (GMA)
■ Marianne Timmons, Wegmans Food Markets
■ Milan Turk Jr., The Procter & Gamble Company
■ Lionel Tussau, Georgia Pacific
■ Pat Walsh, Food Marketing Institute (FMI)
In particular we want to thank Lloyd’s Register Quality Assurance and Hugo Byrnes Associates for their
contribution.
Simon Glass Ruud van der Pluijm Sue Mackesey
The Procter & Gamble Company Royal Ahold Kraft Foods
Co-Chairmen of the JBP Data Accuracy Group
Notes on version 2
The objective of this new version of the Data Quality Framework incl. the Data Quality Protocol is to enable
companies to take a practical approach on the implementation of a Data Quality management System (DQMS).
Version 2 incorporates the self-assessment and self-declaration section developed by AIM, Capgemini and
GS1.
Additionally, a KPI model for master data is now included as a way to effectively assess the quality of the
information. The KPI model also provides validation to a proper implementation of a Data Quality Management
System.
The Data Quality Steering Committee wishes to thank all the organisations and people that participated on the
development of the self-declaration module as well as in the revision and creation of version 2 of the Data
Quality Framework for their valuable contributions, leadership and insight:
■ Kraig Adams, The Coca-Cola Company
■ Bud Babcock, The Procter and Gamble Company
■ Nigel Bagley, Unilever
■ Vincent Bergere, Kraft Foods
■ Edwin Boer, Capgemini
■ Mauricio Breña, GS1 Mexico
■ Greg Buckley, Pepsico
■ Hugo Byrnes, Royal Ahold
■ Debbie Edmondson, The Coca-Cola Company
■ André Frank, Sara Lee
■ Britt Galbreath, SCA
■ Glenn Griglack, Reckitt Benckiser
■ Dave Grissom, The Coca-Cola Company
■ Hein Gorter de Vries, GS1 Netherlands
■ Bruce Hawkins, Wal*Mart
■ Sally Herbert, GS1 GDSN, Inc.
■ Rob Hoffman, The Hershey Company
■ Jeanne Iglesias, The Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA/FPA)
■ Kees Jacobs, Capgemini
■ Mats Johansson, SCA
■ Richard Jones, GS1 Australia
■ Urs-Ulrich Katzenstein, Metro Group Buying
Disclaimer
Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the guidelines to use the GS1 standards contained in the
document are correct, GS1 and any other party involved in the creation of the document HEREBY STATE that
the document is provided without warranty, either expressed or implied, of accuracy or fitness for purpose, AND
HEREBY DISCLAIM any liability, direct or indirect, for damages or loss relating to the use of the document. The
document may be modified, subject to developments in technology, changes to the standards, or new legal
requirements. Several products and company names mentioned herein may be trademarks and/or registered
trademarks of their respective companies.
Table of Contents
1. Data Quality Framework – Executive Summary ........................................................................7
1.1. Background ........................................................................................................................................ 7
1.2. The Benefits of Good Quality Data .................................................................................................... 7
1.3. Data Quality Framework .................................................................................................................... 7
1.3.1. Data Quality Protocol ............................................................................................................... 7
1.3.2. Governance Model ................................................................................................................... 8
2. Guiding Principles......................................................................................................................10
7. Definitions ...................................................................................................................................38
8. Reference Documents................................................................................................................40
The objective of the data quality management system is to provide guidance for organisations to
establish, implement, maintain and improve a data quality management system. The JBP team views
the data quality management system as critical to the medium to longer-term vision for consistent high
quality data to flow through the global supply chain. This system will focus on the existence of internal
business processes, procedures and common performance criteria.
The objective of the inspection procedure is to define a standardised approach for data inspection.
Existing GS1 standards are referenced in the inspection procedure, such as the GS1 GDSN Package
Measurement Rules. The procedure will evolve with GS1 standards, and as an example, will include
tolerances for different product categories as defined by the Global Standards Management Process
(GSMP). Where standards do not currently exist the procedure provides best practice guidelines –
such as a list of common attributes for inspection and sample size recommendations.
It is also the objective for the inspection procedure on the medium to longer-term implementation basis
to merge into the data quality management system.
The JBP team recognises the inspection procedure must be flexible and implemented based on the
requirements of a given trading partner relationship. For example, depending on how advanced a
supplier and/or retailer are in their data quality journey, an initial requirement could be to inspect only a
subset of the attributes included in the inspection procedure.
The JBP team recommends the widespread usage of the Data Quality Protocol, especially for
companies in the GDSN community. However, the JBP team also recognises that compliance to and
usage of the protocol is voluntary.
Data Quality
Steering Committee
Certification or self-declaration of
compliance to the Framework Certification can not
be issued
Non-
Accreditation accredited
Body service
providers
Accredited
Certification
Body
(service Recording
provider) compliance
through a non-
Compliance accredited
through self- service provider
Compliance through declaration
certification by an
accredited third party
2. Guiding Principles
The JBP Data Accuracy charter is to develop a best practice data quality framework for data
synchronised within the global supply chain.
The Global Data Dictionary (GDD) attributes provide the starting point for the framework. It is expected
that the framework will evolve to include more data attributes and business information as exchanged
between trading partners, with the evolvement of the GDD.
The JBP Data Accuracy team believes the full potential of the Global Data Synchronisation Network
(GDSN) will not be realised until trading partners enable the following:
■ Good quality product information is aligned across internal manufacturer systems
■ Good quality product Information is synchronised through the GDSN
■ Product Information within retailer systems is aligned with the product information received via
the GDSN
In developing the Data Quality framework, the following guiding principles have been adhered to. The
data quality framework:
1. Is based on user needs (e.g., suppliers and recipients of data)
2. Is strongly encouraged within the Global Data Synchronisation Network community, yet is
voluntary
3. Is implemented based upon requirements of a given trading partner relationship
4. Is comprehensive in its structure and potential implementation, yet provides for flexible
implementation, as required by the trading partners
5. Minimises implementation, management and other additional costs to the global supply chain, and
enables readily quantifiable benefits to all supply chain partners
6. Is complementary to and evolves with changes to GS1 standards
7. Is based on a Data Quality industry protocol
□ The protocol has two components; i) data inspection against product characteristics, and
ii) a data quality management procedure to validate the existence and effectiveness of key
data management business processes
- The inspection component of the protocol defines a standardised approach for product
inspection (e.g., use GS1 measuring rules, inspect common attributes, use a common
sample size and leverage GS1 packaging tolerances). It accounts for small, medium and
large enterprises
- The data quality management component of the protocol provides guidance for
organisations to establish, document, implement, manage, maintain and improve a data
quality management system
8. Enables trading partners to choose their data quality approach (e.g., engage with accredited entity
to obtain certification, engage with a non-accredited entity, or self-declare). Self-declaration is an
option for companies that have internal capabilities to comply with the protocol
9. Is based on an open system, whereby any accredited business entity may offer product inspection
and/or data quality management certification with reference to the Data Quality protocol
10. Allows any business entity to use the Data Quality protocol -- its widespread application is actively
encouraged. However, certification cannot be provided by a non-accredited organisation
11. Has been subject to an industry review period
12. Includes ongoing governance to provide stewardship over the framework. The Data Quality
Steering Committee will be responsible for employing a neutral accreditation authority to accredit
certification bodies (for business entities that wish to be certified). The Steering Committee will
also be responsible to implement a continuous improvement process for the data quality
framework
13. Is based on a principle that manufacturers own and are responsible for the data they synchronise
through their "Home Data Pool", and that they do not accept any third-party updates in the public
domain (without their consent).
The intended user community for this framework is comprised of manufacturers, retailers, wholesalers,
intermediaries, GS1 Member Organisations, data pools and solution providers.
3.2.3. Planning
3.2.3.5. Objectives
Responsible management shall ensure that data quality management objectives, including those to
meet data synchronisation requirements, are established at relevant functions and levels within the
organisation. The data quality management objectives shall be measurable and consistent with the
data quality management policy.
3.2.4.1. Responsibilities
Responsible management shall ensure that data quality management responsibilities and authorities
are defined, documented and communicated within the organisation.
Responsible management shall appoint a manager or managers who, irrespective of other
responsibilities, shall have the responsibility and authority to:
■ Ensure that processes needed for the data quality management system are established,
implemented and maintained
■ Report to responsible management on the performance of the data quality management
system and any need for improvement
■ Ensure the promotion of awareness of data quality requirements throughout the organisation.
If more than one manager is appointed the division of responsibilities shall be recorded and
communicated throughout the organisation.
Responsible management shall ensure that the integrity of the data quality management system is
maintained when changes to the data quality management system are planned and implemented.
3.2.4.2. Reviews
At suitable stages responsible management shall perform systematic reviews of processes,
procedures, documents and product data in accordance with planned arrangements:
■ To evaluate the ability to meet data quality requirements
■ To identify any issues and propose necessary action.
Participants in such reviews shall consist of representatives of functions concerned with data quality.
Records of the results of the reviews and any necessary actions shall be maintained.
3.2.4.5.1. General
The organisation shall establish, maintain and document the operational processes needed for
product measuring and data generation, product master data input, product master data handling and
external data publishing, consistent with the requirements of the data quality management system.
Operational processes and business decisions influencing product attributes shall be identified. Where
appropriate, provisions shall be made in these processes to ensure that any change in data
characteristics is recorded and that appropriate actions are undertaken to continuously guarantee the
good quality of published data.
■ Evaluate the need for action to prevent occurrence of data quality issues
■ Determine and implement necessary actions
■ Keep records of results of action taken
■ Review preventive action taken.
4.1.1. Background
To test the level of compliance to the requirements specified in section 3 of the GS1 Data Quality
Framework including the Data Quality Protocol, a self-assessment is provided in this section. This self-
assessment procedure offers a tool for organisations to tests their compliance to the Framework and
may result in a self-declaration if the outcome of the self-assessment meets the necessary standards.
The self-assessment has been developed in 2006/2007 by a team consisting of consumer product
manufacturers, retailers, GMA/FPA, AIM, GS1 GDSN, and Capgemini.
Section 3 (Data Quality Management System Requirements) from the GS1 Data Quality Framework is
the basis for the self-assessment. The requirements from that section have been formatted as a
questionnaire during several workshops in Europe and the US. Following the workshops, the self-
assessment questionnaire and KPI scorecard have been tested in a pilot in both the US and the EU.
Based on the pilot results and revisions by the Data Quality Steering Committee and other Industry
groups, the questionnaire has been further modified into the current format.
■ With the self-declaration, the self-assessment results can be used in the communication
between the manufacturer and retailer. If a manufacturer or retailer is meeting prerequisites
set, they can then self-declare compliance to the protocol.
Note: Every organisation can choose, at its own discretion, the best course of action to execute
a self-assessment; for instance, companies may wish to execute an assessment ‘in isolation’
before involving other third parties and/or external consulting aid in the process.
1. Decision to
conduct self
assessment
2. Determine scope:
- products
- locations
-markets
3. Plan self-assessment
- participants
- timeline
- communication
- training
4. Conduct self
assessment
9. Identify
improvement
areas
6. Calculate scores
no
Fulfillment of
requirements for self
declaration
yes
8. Communicate self
declaration to retailers
These KPIs are an integral part of the overall assessment of data quality and compliance to the Data
Quality Framework. In principle, when an organisation has solid internal processes for the
management of the quality of the data, the information output should reflect the effectiveness of these
internal processes by obtaining consistent high marks on the KPI assessments. If the information
obtains low results on the KPIs, it is to be taken as an indication that the assessment of the internal
processes requires further revision and correction.
At the same time, obtaining high marks on the KPI results while having a low score on the assessment
questionnaire, also means that processes are not properly connected and that the accuracy of the
data is being affected by additional factors. Thus, it should be the objective of any organisation
attempting to implement the Data Quality Framework to obtain satisfactory results on the KPIs which
validate the efficiency of internal processes.
The Data Quality Steering Committee recommends trading partners to internally establish
collaborative goals for the for KPI measurements; however, a general guideline for the Industry on
target KPI levels has been included in Annex 7 as a means to provide orientation over the course of
action that organisations should follow depending on the quality of their data.
Note: The KPI model here described is applicable to all sections of the Data Quality
Framework, thus it may also be used in conjunction with the product inspection procedure
prescribed on section 6 as a stand-alone best practice to perform audits on the data.
Validation of proper
Internal Consistent implementation of the
process KPI Data Quality
assessment results Framework
Definition The percentage of items that have accurate and complete values for all data attributes
included in the scope of the Data Quality Protocol.
4. Hierarchy accuracy
Definition The percentage of items that have the GS1 standards correctly applied and have
accurate and complete values for all hierarchy attributes (see list below).
Attributes - totalQuantityOfNextLowerLevelTradeItem
- quantityOfTradeItemsPerPalletLayer
- quantityOfTradeItemsPerPallet
- quantityOfLayersPerPallet
- quantityOfCompleteLayersContainedInATradeItem
- quantityOfTradeItemsContainedInACompleteLayer
- quantityOfNextLevelTradeItemWithinInnerPack
Note: Please note that the hierarchy attributes listed above do not apply at the same time to all
items; please refer to Annex 6 for the applicability and definition of each attribute in order to
determine their relevance and usability in a specific item.
5. Active / Orderable
Definition The percentage of items in the home data pool that are still active/orderable or have an
accurate end date
4.3.2. Scope
Since this is a new activity, some pragmatic scope-restrictions are taken into account in order to
increase the feasibility of execution:
■ Focus on selected set of GDSN attributes (see table on Annex 6), for example:
□ globalTradeItemNumber
□ classificationCategoryCode
□ netContent
Other attributes (like additional optional attributes and/or retailer-specific attributes) are out of
scope, but in future these can be included based on agreements between specific trading
partners. In case of optional and dependant fields, specific checks may need to be conducted –
resulting in additional KPI’s.
■ Inspection of data published in the Manufacturer Home Data Pool (i.e. after publishing by
the manufacturer, based on the data that is available for the recipient data pool of the
retailer).
When a manufacturer does not participate in a data pool, measurements should be taken at the
end of the process within the manufacturer before “virtual publication”.
■ Inspection and measurement takes place on both consumer item level and trade item levels
(pallet, merchandising unit, trade unit).
3. Inspection preparation:
Recommendation: read the Best Practice Guidelines for Standard Package Measurement Tolerances
(http://www.gs1.org/docs/gsmp/gdsn/GDSN_Standard_Package_Measurement_Tolerances_Best_Pract
ice_i1.pdf)
a. Inspection lists should be prepared per article and the related product chain (see
‘Inspection List’ template).
The manufacturer’s internal item codes should be pre-printed on the Lists.
To prevent measurement from being influenced, the data pool values should not
be printed on the lists.
b. Locate physical products of the listed internal item codes
c. Nominate people with the right knowledge about GS1 rules in order to do an efficient and accurate
inspection.
d. Make sure you have all the listed items available in warehouse(s) and/or factory(ies).
4. Inspection
All physical measures (dimensions and weight) have to be taken by using appropriate equipment.
Physical measures and item classifications have to be in line with the related GS1 System rules. Other
information (e.g. GTIN, net weight) needs to be read directly from the real items.
Following attributes need to be inspected and measured as described below, with the results being
recorded on the prepared Inspection List:
c. Hierarchy Accuracy
- totalQuantityOfNextLowerLevelTradeItem
- quantityOfTradeItemsPerPalletLayer
- quantityOfTradeItemsPerPallet
- quantityOfLayersPerPallet
- quantityOfCompleteLayersContainedInATradeItem
- quantityOfTradeItemsContainedInACompleteLayer
- quantityOfNextLevelTradeItemWithinInnerPack
5. Analysis
The results from the Inspection lists will have to be compared against the information that is stored in
the manufacturer’s home data pool (or internal master data system if no data pool is in use yet).
Organisations may also use the ‘Data Quality Master Data KPI Checklist’ to indicate whether the
values of each inspected attribute is matching the data from the data pool. The ‘Data Quality Master
Data KPI Checklist’ already incorporates GS1 applicable standards such as tolerances.
If the ‘Data Quality Master Data KPI Checklist’ is not used to analyse the results, applicable GS1
System rules and standards must be considered by the organisation.
Only items that are accurate on all attributes are considered accurate on item level.
Note: In order to improve the readability of the Data Quality Framework, the complete self-
declaration questionnaire is can be found in Annex 1 on page 50.
Target
a. Basic questions: 219 points
b. General questions: 109 points
Total: 328 points
Thus in order to reach the level for self declaration, the targets on both basic and general questions
have to be reached. That means at least 219 points have to be scored on the basic questions and
109 points on the general questions.
Number of
Maximum points Target Points Target%
questions
Basic Questions 34 272 219 81%
General Questions 40 138 109 79%
Total 74 410 328 80%
The scoring template for the questionnaire necessary to perform an assessment can be found
on Annex 2.
certified, that may lead to a conflict of interest during the two years preceding the audit, based on the
principle that an auditor should not audit his own work.
The certification body shall accept decisions from GS1 GDSN’s Steering Committee, through which
interested parties can influence the audit method.
The function of the staff within the certification body is to review whether the certification body is able
to carry out the audit for each applicant for a certificate. The staff shall also be able to select, train and
prepare auditors. The staff shall be capable of implementing procedures for performing audits and re-
audits.
The certification body shall have criteria for training of auditors and appointing auditors and ensure
that the auditor meets the requirements set with respect to matters such as:
■ Understanding of data quality issues
■ Knowledge of companies and data systems to be audited
■ Knowledge of guidelines and regulations.
The audit shall be performed by a person or a team.
The certification body shall distinguish between the process of auditing and the decision about issuing
and withdrawing certificates. This decision shall be taken impartially. The power of decision may be
with an individual or with a group. The auditor shall prepare a report for the decision maker(s) at the
certification body and for the organisation involved.
Phase 1 audit
The objective of the phase 1 audit is to gain sufficient insight into the management system so as to aid
the planning process for the phase 2 audit. The organisation’s preparedness for certification will be
assessed. An investigation will be made of the degree to which:
■ The DQMSR management system was established in order to achieve the organisation’s data
quality policy
■ Processes are in line with DQMSR requirements
■ The internal audit conforms to the DQMSR
■ The management reviews have taken, among other things, evaluation of the effectiveness of
the DQMSR management system into account.
A review of documents is part of the phase 1 audit. The place where the phase 1 audit is performed
can be decided in consultation with the organisation.
The certification body shall be able to demonstrate that review of all elements of the DQMSR has been
part of the phase 1 audit. Non-conformities identified shall be addressed and solved before a
certificate can be granted. The Phase 2 audit can be planned before all non-conformities are solved.
Phase 2 audit
The objectives of the phase 2 audit are:
■ To confirm that the organisation complies with its own policies and procedures
■ To confirm that the management system complies with all elements of the DQMSR and is
capable of achieving the organisation’s policy objectives
■ To audit/inspect samples of product measurement and data generation
■ To audit the method for processing data for a number of products.
A DQMSR certificate means that data quality is managed.
Special attention shall be paid to:
■ Setting the criteria for data quality
■ Defining responsibilities for data quality processes
Observation
A finding requiring attention by the organisation, although not necessarily requiring remedial action.
Improvement note
An isolated or sporadic lapse in the content or implementation of procedures or records, which could
reasonably lead to failure of the system if not corrected.
Non-conformity
The absence of one or more required DQMSR system elements or incomplete documentation and
information, which raise significant doubt as to the capability of the data quality management practises
to achieve the policy and objectives of the organisation.
All non-conformities must be eliminated before a certificate can be granted. Improvement notes are
acceptable. If non-conformities cannot be closed or downgraded to improvement notes, the certificate
will be withdrawn.
5.3.4. Report
The audit report shall contain sufficient information to enable a decision on the issuing of a certificate
including:
■ Information about the certified organisation
■ An account of the investigation (such as approach, subjects investigated, time spent, audit
team)
■ The degree of compliance which the various requirements of DQMSR. Non- conformities shall
be explained
■ A summary of the most important findings, both positive and negative, with respect to the
implementation and effectiveness of the management system
■ A summary of the documentation from the phase 1 audit
■ The final evaluation by the audit team.
The report shall be sent to the organisation audited and filed at the certification body.
A DQMSR certificate will be issued if it can be demonstrated that the DQMSR have been evaluated
and they have been met.
5.3.6. Certificate
A DQMSR certificate can be issued by a certification body. The certificate will be sent to the involved
organisation as a statement of conformity with the DQMSR requirements. The certificate is based on
an audit of a data quality management system.
This Inspection Procedure is set up to verify the accuracy of data entered by data suppliers into the
Global Data Synchronisation Network (GDSN). This procedure is managed by GS1 GDSN Inc. Further
it is recognised that organisations benefit from feedback from data recipients.
Important: The KPI model for master data defined on section 4.3 are applicable to this
inspection procedure as well, so it should be the goal of an organisation to achieve results equal
or higher to minimum satisfactory marks established for the KPIs.
Important: The sampling methodology prescribed by the Data Quality Framework (see Annex
3) considers that each item on the sample will have a different GTIN/GLN/Target Market
combination.
Thus, the sample sizes and methodology do not refer to occasions where several instance of
the same item (same GTIN/GLN/Target Market) are measured.
Companies may only obtain valid KPI measurements and data quality indications by applying
the sampling methodology as prescribed by the Framework.
However, in cases where manufacturers may want to measure several instances of the same
item (same GTIN/GLN/Target Market) -for instance, when measuring several instances of a
product with a high variability rate in order to produce an median measurement to report- they
are still encouraged to apply the steps and recommendations of the rest of the inspection
procedure, in order to guarantee consistency and uniformity on the measurements.
6.9. Inspection
Inspection is performed by the inspection body in line with all reference documents as mentioned in
this inspection procedure as well as principles of good practise.
Data is verified against the data published into the data pool.
Correct entry into the data pool is defined as: all product attribute values and measurements are found
within tolerance (where applicable) ranges and in compliance with definitions from the GDSN
Package Measurement Rules, GS1 Global Data Dictionary, and any other applicable documentation
from the GS1 System.
Organisations should aim for ultimately obtaining 100% data accuracy, though initial goals can be set
on achieving minimum levels agreed by trading partners. Trading partners should use the KPI model
from section 4.3 as a means to measure accuracy.
Annex 7 proposes a general recommendation on acceptable levels of compliance with said KPIs.
It is appreciated that sections of the report may be shortened or lengthened to meet specific reporting
needs.
The report contains the following sections:
■ Inspection summary
■ Inspection scope
■ Reference documents
■ Overview of inspection findings / results / performance.
Reports are produced and despatched to the organisation within an agreed timescale.
Further the inspection body provides a declaration of inspection, which the data supplier can provide
to the data recipient to prove conformity.
6.13. Complaints
The inspection body will have a documented procedure for dealing with complaints received from
organisations and other relevant parties. Records of the review and actions arising from complaints
shall be maintained.
7. Definitions
Throughout this document, the following definitions apply:
Accreditation
Procedure by which an authoritative body gives formal recognition of the competence of a certification
body to provide certification services, against an international standard.
Accreditation body
Agency having jurisdiction to formally recognise the competence of a certification body to provide
certification services.
Audit
Systematic and functionally independent examination to determine whether activities and related
results comply with a standard, whereby all the elements of this standard are covered by reviewing the
data suppliers’ manual and related procedures, together with an inspection of the data and the
applicable products.
Auditor
Person qualified to carry out audits for or on behalf of a certification body.
Certification
Procedure by which accredited certification bodies, based on an audit or an inspection, provide written
or equivalent assurance that data and where applicable their management system and its
implementation conform to requirements.
Certification body
Provider of certification services, accredited to do so by an accreditation body.
GLN
A Global Location Number is a unique numerical value used to identify a location either virtual or
physical of an organisation, upon which there is a need to retrieve pre-defined information.
GPC
Global Product Classification is the standard taxonomy schema for products used in GDSN. It is
composed of 4 levels, Segment, Family, Class and Brick. GPC is maintained by GS1.
GTIN
A particular Global Trade Item Number is unique numerical value used to identify a trade item. A trade
item is any item (product or service) upon which there is a need to retrieve pre-defined information and
that may be planned, priced, ordered, delivered and or invoiced at any point in any supply chain.
GSMP
The Global Standards Management Process (GSMP) was created by GS1 and GS1 US to support
standards development activity for the GS1 System. The GSMP uses a global consensus process to
develop supply chain standards that are based on business needs and user-input.
Inspection
Examination of data and the applicable products, in order to verify that they conform to requirements.
Organisation
Company, corporation, firm, enterprise, authority or institution, or part or combination thereof, whether
incorporated or not, public or private, that has its own functions and administration.
Note: For organisations with more than one operating unit, a single operating unit may be defined as
an organisation.
Self-assessment
Self-administered assessment of compliance to the requirements for a Data Quality Management
System which is performed according to the procedure prescribed by the Data Quality Framework.
Self-declaration
A formal statement by an organisation in which the organisation declares that the product data
published in the data pool meets the requirements of GDSN.
Target Market
Geographical region in which a particular product is intended to be sold, distributed and
commercialised.
8. Reference Documents
The most up-to-date version of the following documents shall be used for data quality management
system audits, product measuring and inspection of data accuracy. The links to the repository where
the most recently published versions of these documents can be found are listed next to the document
entry:
■ Business Requirement Document For Data Synchronisation Data Model for Trade Item (Data
Definition)
http://www.gs1.org/docs/gsmp/gdsn/Data_Synchronization_Data_Model_for_Trade_Item.pdf
■ Global Data Dictionary http://gdd.gs1.org/GDD/public/default.asp
■ GDSN Package Measurement Rules for Data Alignment including Standards Tolerances for
Data Accuracy http://www.gs1.org/docs/gsmp/gdsn/GDSN_Package_Measurement_Rules.pdf
■ GTIN Allocation Rules http://www.gs1.org/gtinrules/
■ GLN Allocation Rules http://www.gs1.org/glnrules/
■ GPC Published Standards http://www.gs1.org/productssolutions/gdsn/gpc/
■ Miscellaneous data quality support documentation at GS1 GDSN
http://www.gs1.org/productssolutions/gdsn/dqf/index.html
Questions
1.1.1 Does the organisation have a documented data quality management structure in place?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.1.3 Does the documentation of this data quality management structure includes data quality management
manual, objectives and targets?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No (if no, go to 1.1.6)
1.1.4 To what extent are the objectives on data quality management measurable?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.1.5 To what extent does the documentation of this data quality management structure contain the data
quality management action plans?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.1.6 To what extent does the documentation of this data quality management structure contain the data
quality management risk identification, risk assessment, and risk control actions?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.1.7 Do you have a procedure implemented to facilitate changes to the data quality management structure?
Example: test routines
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.1.8 To what extent does the Data Management structure comply with the GS1 standards for packaging
measurements and tolerances?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
Questions
1.2.1 To what extent has the organisation implemented the GDSN requirements for data synchronisation?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.2.2 Is there a process in place to keep the organisation up-to-date regarding the GDSN requirements?
[implementation and internal communication]
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
Questions
1.3.1 Is the ownership of the data within the organisation defined and documented, and/or implemented?
Example: RACI chart, master data catalogue
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.3.2 Does the organisation have work instructions and a available to support data quality management
processes?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.3.3 Does the organisation make use of standardised monitoring and measuring processes?
Example: Auditing
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.3.4 To what extent does the organisation use equipment as recommended by GS1 in the ‘Best Practice
Guidelines for Standard Package Measurement Tolerances’ within all relevant data quality management
processes for dimensions measurement?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.3.5 Are the tools that require calibration being calibrated within your organisation (either by internal or
external certified service providers), according to requirements?
a) Yes
b) No
Questions
1.4.1 Does the organisation make use of a single source of the truth for product master data to manage and
share data with trading partners?
a) Yes
b) No
1.4.2 To what extent does the database structure have access authorisation procedures?
Attach: examples of security systems and tools that are used
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
1.4.3 Does the organisation have a structure in place to ensure the security of data from unauthorised
change?
Example: Restrict update rights capability, access rights
Example: IS backing up files (tapes available)
Example: Schedule review of security rights (right people entering data)
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
1.4.4 To what extent does the database structure ensure traceability of amendments (change history)?
Attach: examples of security systems and tools that are used
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
- Ensure that processes needed for the data quality management system are established, implemented
and maintained
- Report to responsible management on the performance of the data quality management system and
any need for improvement
- Ensure the promotion of awareness of data quality requirements throughout the organisation.
If more than one manager is appointed, the division of responsibilities shall be recorded and communicated
throughout the organisation.
Responsible management shall ensure that the integrity of the data quality management system is maintained
when changes to the data quality management system are planned and implemented.
Questions
2.1.1 Has the organisation defined the data quality management roles and responsibilities?
Example: data quality manager responsibilities
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
2.1.2 Do the manager(s) who are appointed have the responsibility and authority to ensure that processes
needed for the data quality management structure are established, implemented and maintained?
Example: data quality manager responsibilities
a) Yes
b) No (go to 2.2.1)
2.1.3 In case more than one manager is appointed: Has the division of responsibilities been recorded and
communicated throughout the organisation?
a) Yes, or not applicable
b) No
2.2 Reviews
At suitable stages systematic reviews of processes, procedures, documents and product data shall be
performed by responsible management in accordance with planned arrangements:
- To evaluate the ability to meet data quality requirements
- To identify any issues and propose necessary action.
Participants in such reviews shall consist of representatives of functions concerned with data quality. Records of
the results of the reviews and any necessary actions shall be maintained.
Questions
2.2.1 Does the organisation periodically audit the data quality management structure?
Example: Include review of processes, procedures, document, product data
Audits: prove of adherence to procedures outlined, adherence to internal requirements
a) Yes, yearly
b) Yes, every two years
c) Yes, every three to five years
d) No, never
2.2.2 Are the results of these audits shared within the organisation?
Audits: prove of adherence to procedures outlined, adherence to internal requirements
Example: intranet / extranet / email
a) Yes
b) No
2.2.3 Do the audits result in documented and communicated action plans, if required?
Including feedback from auditors and clients (retailers)
Example: training, change in equipment.
a) Yes
b) No
Questions
2.3.1 To what extent has the organisation identified what skills and talents are required in managing data
quality?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.3.2 To what extent do the people in place who to manage data quality have the right talents and skills set?
Example: job descriptions, checked by HRM, QA management
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.3.3 To what extent are people working with master data part of an ongoing training program?
Example: Training program
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.3.4 To what extent does the organisation maintain appropriate records of education, training, skills, and
experience?
HR recording via personal file
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.3.5 To what extent does the organisation evaluate the effectiveness of the actions taken to increase the
competencies of personnel regarding data quality?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
Questions
2.4.1 Is there an ongoing internal communication process on any aspect of data quality, to create awareness
within the organisation on the importance of providing highly accurate data?
Example: Internal websites, email, newsletter, other tools
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
The organisation shall establish and maintain a procedure / procedures for product measurement and data
generation in accordance with GS1 requirements.
The organisation shall determine appropriate:
- Methods for measuring product attributes
- Measuring equipment
- Measuring location and conditions
- Personnel to perform the measurements
- Method for the recording of measurement data.
Questions
2.5.1.1 Has the organisation got operational processes needed for product measuring and data generation (in
accordance GS1 requirements)?
Example: Reporting structure, responsibilities, work instructions, work flow routines
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
2.5.1.2 Does the organisation have a specific process for generating and checking the data
for new products, prior to first distribution of new products?
Example: finished product may vary from design – reality check
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
2.5.1.3 To what extent are the GDS definitions on attributes applied internally?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.5.1.4 To what extent has the organisation determined appropriate methods for the recording of measurement
data?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.5.1.5 Is the output data in compliance with standards of the GS1 accepted units of
measure?
Attach: GS1 standards
a) Yes
b) No
2.5.1.6 Does the organisation have a GTIN, GPC and GLN allocation policy?
Example: GTIN: Global Trade Identification Number (attach documents)
GPC: Global Product Clasification
GLN; Global Location Number
Example: (conditions under which change in product needs change in barcode)
a) Yes
b) No
2.5.1.7 To what extent is the GTIN policy applied within the organisation?
Example: (GTIN: Global Trade Identification Number)
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
2.5.1.8 Does the organisation have a process in place for checking product data during the product lifetime
(ongoing check)?
a) Yes
b) No
Questions
2.5.2.1 Does the organisation have approved processes and procedures for data input?
Example: Procedures for data input (accuracy check of previous day, sampling of new data, spot check,
and verification audits)
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
2.5.2.2 Does the organisation review the procedures for data input and creation for adequacy?
a) Yes, yearly
b) Yes, every two years
c) Yes, every three to five years
d) No, never
2.5.2.3 Has the organisation established, maintained, and documented the operational processes needed for
internal data publishing?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
Responsible management shall appoint a manager or managers who, irrespective of other responsibilities, shall
be made responsible for data publishing.
If more than one manager is appointed the division of responsibilities shall be recorded and communicated
throughout the organisation.
Questions
2.5.3.1 Have critical success factors (key elements that ensure a satisfactory performance) been established in
the processes for external data publishing?
a) Yes
b) No
2.5.3.2 Has the organisation established and maintained procedures to control the process of publishing
product data into external data pools?
Example: organisational set-up, clear lines of responsibilities
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
2.5.3.3 Does the data publishing process include all necessary provisions to ensure that product changes
published into external data pools is based upon the most relevant version of the product?
a) Yes
b) No
2.5.3.4 To what extent does the data publishing process include all necessary provisions to ensure that product
data attributes published into external data pools can be traced back to its origin?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
Questions
3.1.1 Which monitoring methods on master data management are used within the organisation to evaluate
and track the data quality management processes and procedures?
Answer: internal/external auditing, process performance indicators, user feedback
3.1.2 Are performance indicators defined for each process in the data management structure?
Example: feedback from clients, data reports
a) Yes, always
b) Yes, most of the time
c) Yes, sometimes
d) No, never
3.1.4 After recurrence of known failures, are steps taken to prevent recurring?
a) Yes, always
b) Yes, most of the time
c) Yes, sometimes
d) No, never
3.1.5 To what extent are all corrections suitable, made in both the product master data and the published data
(if relevant)?
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
3.1.6 Based on the results of the analysis of performance indicators, are the data quality management
structure processes changed or adapted?
a) Yes, always
b) Yes, most of the time
c) Yes, sometimes
d) No, never
3.1.7 Are the results on the performance indicators communicated within the organisation and if applicable to
3rd party service providers?
Example: email, newsletter, internal website, etc
a) Yes, always
b) Yes, most of the time
c) Yes, sometimes
d) No, never
Questions
3.2.1 Is a documented procedure in place for handling customer complaints concerning data quality?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
3.2.2 Are improvement actions initiated based on the analysis of customer feedback?
a) Yes, always
3.2.3 Are written responses issued to customers in regards their data quality complaints?
a) Yes, always
b) Yes, most of the time
c) Yes, sometimes
d) No, never
Audit programmes shall be planned, established, implemented and maintained by the organisation, taking into
consideration the importance of the data quality management system processes and the results of previous
audits.
The organisation shall establish and maintain a documented audit procedure that addresses:
- Responsibilities and requirements for planning and conducting audits, reporting results and retaining
associated records,
- Determination of audit criteria, scope, frequency and methods.
The selection of auditors and the conduct of audits shall ensure objectivity and impartiality of the audit process.
Questions
3.3.1 Is there a process for determining the criteria, scope, frequency and methods for executing internal
audits of the data quality management system?
a) Yes, implemented, documented and regularly reviewed
b) Yes, implemented and documented
c) Yes, implemented
d) Yes, documented
e) No
The Review output shall include any decisions and actions related to:
- Improvement of the effectiveness of the data quality management system and its processes to ensure
data quality and accuracy
- Improvement of customer related requirements with respect to data quality management
- Resource needs.
Questions
4.1.1 Does the management periodically review the organisation’s data quality management structure and
performance on data quality?
a) Yes, yearly
b) Yes, every two years
c) Yes, every three to five years
d) No, never
4.1.2 To what extent does the review include assessing opportunities for improvement and the need for
changes to the data quality management structure, including the data quality management policy and
objectives?
Example: Description of functioning auditing organisation
a) 90% or more
b) From 50% to 90%
c) From 10 % to 50%
d) From 0% to 10%
4.1.5 Does the review input include reports from data quality management inspections?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.6 Does the review input include data user and stakeholder feedback?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.8 Does the review input include status of preventive and corrective actions?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.9 Does the review input include follow-up actions from previous management reviews?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.10 Does the review input include changes that could affect the data quality management
structure?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.12 Does the review input include the evaluation of the KPI results?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.13 Does the review output include decisions and action related to improvement of the effectiveness of the
data quality management structure?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.14 Does the review output include decisions and action related to improvement of the effectiveness of the
data quality processes to ensure data quality and accuracy?
a) Yes
b) No
4.1.15 Does the review output include decisions and action related to improvement of customer related
requirements with respect to data quality management?
a) Yes
b) No
1.1.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.1.2 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.1.3 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.1.4 6 4 2 0
1.1.5 4 3 1 0
1.1.6 4 3 1 0
1.1.7 4 3 3 1 0
1.1.8 B 8 6 2 0
1.2.1 B 8 6 2 0
1.2.2 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.3.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.3.2 4 3 3 1 0
1.3.3 6 5 4 1 0
1.3.4 B 8 6 2 0
1.3.5 2 0
1.4.1 B 8 0
1.4.2 B 8 6 2 0
1.4.3 B 8 7 6 1 0
1.4.4 B 8 6 2 0
1.4.5 6 5 4 1 0
Subtotal
2.1.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.1.2 6 0
2.1.3 4 0
2.2.1 B 8 6 4 0
2.2.2 4 0
2.2.3 4 0
2.3.1 B 8 6 2 0
2.3.2 B 8 6 2 0
2.3.3 B 8 6 2 0
2.3.4 2 1 1 0
2.3.5 2 1 1 0
2.4.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.1.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.1.2 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.1.3 4 3 1 0
2.5.1.4 6 4 2 0
2.5.1.5 B 8 0
2.5.1.6 B 8 0
2.5.1.7 B 8 0 0 0
2.5.1.8 4 0
2.5.2.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.2.2 2 2 1 0
2.5.2.3 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.3.1 6 0
2.5.3.2 B 8 7 6 1 0
2.5.3.3 6 0
2.5.3.4 B 8 6 2 0
2.5.3.5 B 8 0
Subtotal
3.1.1 0 0 0 0 0
3.1.2 B 8 6 4 0
3.1.3 4 3 1 0
3.1.4 B 8 6 4 0
3.1.5 4 3 1 0
3.1.6 4 3 2 0
3.1.7 4 3 2 0
3.2.1 B 8 7 6 1 0
3.2.2 B 8 6 4 0
3.2.3 4 3 2 0
3.3.1 6 5 4 1 0
Subtotal
4.1.1 B 8 6 4 0
4.1.2 B 8 6 2 0
4.1.3 2 0
4.1.4 2 0
4.1.5 2 0
4.1.6 2 0
4.1.7 2 0
4.1.8 2 0
4.1.9 2 0
4.1.10 2 0
4.1.11 2 0
4.1.12 2 0
4.1.13 2 0
4.1.14 2 0
4.1.15 2 0
Subtotal
Basic General
questions questions
Subtotal section 1
Subtotal section 2
Subtotal section 3
Subtotal section 4
Total Score
C. Annex 3: Sampling
Example of sample sizes in each sample group based on the sample formula.
N sample n sample
1 1 500 73
5 3 1000 132
10 5 1250 161
25 8 1750 217
50 13 2500 300
100 20 3500 410
250 41 4000 464
4. The data supplier will strive for the widest variation in trade items possible, based on dimensions
and the packaging material code. However, it is recommended to select different trade items from
the same hierarchy as much as possible.
1
In the sense that they have a unique GTIN-GLN-Target Market combination
Sample justification
- Total number of GTINs ‘live’ in the GDSN data pool
- Overview of GTINs considered like items
- Division of GTINs in sample groups (include Trade Item Description for reference purposes)
- Sample size for each sample group.
Measuring equipment
Overview of measuring equipment with relevant specifications (type, brand, serial number, etc.)
Table to indicate which product attribute will be measured with what type of measuring equipment.
Inspection summary
Brief summary of the inspection which states at least: organisation reference data, number of
inspected GTINs and statement on performance in % of inspected GTINs.
Inspection scope
- Organisation reference data (name, department/ business unit, address, contact person, etc.)
- Visited locations
- Number of GTINs.
Reference documents
References should be made to all documents used during the inspection, including version numbers
and publication dates.
Action plan
- Overview of all inaccurate data for corrective measures by the organisation
- Other (additional) inspections planned to verify data accuracy.
Annexes
- Overview of inspected GTINs and inspected packaging levels.
Definitions:
1
Headword Definition
Source line
452 Trade item A Trade Item is any product or service upon which there is a need to retrieve pre-defined information and that may be
priced, ordered or invoiced at any point in any supply chain.
UN/CEFACT Unit of measure Indication of the unit of measurement in which weight (mass), capacity, length, area, volume or other quantity is
expressed.
Attributes:
1 2 3
Line Item name Definition/explanation Applicability Recorded result Category (KPI)
EAN.UCC numbering structures will be used for the
identification of trade items. All of them will be
considered as 14-digit Global Trade Item Number
(GTIN). Must be present to enable data to be
The individual Generic
presented to trade item catalogue. Must be
664 globalTradeItemNumber All levels GTIN, or Not attributes
submitted by the owner of the data (who may be the Exist
original manufacturer, the importer, the broker or the
agent of the original manufacturer). This field is
mandatory within the Global Data Synchronization
work process.
4 Global EAN.UCC classification category code. Individual GPC Generic
768 classificationCategoryCode All levels
Unique, permanent 8-digit key. code attributes
January 2008, Issue 2 - DRAFT All contents copyright © GS1 2008 Page 62 of 66
Data Quality Framework Including the Data Quality Protocol
1 2 3
Line Item name Definition/explanation Applicability Recorded result Category (KPI)
This field is automatically generated by the
concatenation of the "brand"," sub-brand",
"functional name" and "variant". Free form text field,
this data element is repeatable for each language
used and must be associated with a valid ISO
language code . Description
5 Generic
1254 tradeItemDescription All levels provided by the
This is a derived attribute resulting from the attributes
manufacturer
concatenation of 4 other attributes. When
implemented, these four attributes may be
concatenated as appropriate. Item description is
part of the set of core data that will be stored in the
Registry.
The amount of the trade item contained by a Declared
4645 netContent Consumer unit
package, as claimed on the label. quantity or Generic
weight [pieces, attributes
netContent Unit of Measure g/lbs]
The measurement from front to back of the
4421 Depth consumer trade item or the longest side of the base All levels
6 Dimensions &
of the non-consumer trade item . Depth (mm/in)
weight
depth Unit of Measure
The measurement from left to right of the consumer
4767 Width trade item or the shortest side of the base of the All levels Dimensions &
non-consumer trade item. Width (mm/in)
weight
width Unit of Measure
The measurement of the height of the trade item.
The vertical dimension from the lowest extremity to
4567 Height the highest extremity, including packaging. At a All levels Dimensions &
pallet level the trade item height will include the Height (mm/in)
weight
height of the pallet itself.
height Unit of Measure
Used to identify the gross weight of the trade item.
The gross weight includes all packaging materials of
4542 grossWeight All levels Gross weight Dimensions &
the trade item. At pallet level the trade item gross
weight includes the weight of the pallet itself. (kg/lb) weight
January 2008, Issue 2 - DRAFT All contents copyright © GS1 2008 Page 63 of 66
Data Quality Framework Including the Data Quality Protocol
1 2 3
Line Item name Definition/explanation Applicability Recorded result Category (KPI)
All levels
totalQuantityOfNextLowerLevelTra This represents the Total quantity of next lower level Hierarchy
492 except Quantity
deItem trade items that this trade item contains. attribute
consumer unit
The number of trade items contained on a single Trade Unit
quantityOfTradeItemsPerPalletLay layer of a pallet. Only used if the pallet has no GTIN. levels (when
Hierarchy
4163 7 It indicates the number of trade items placed on a pallet unit has Quantity
er attribute
pallet layer according to supplier or retailer no GTIN
preferences. allocated)
Trade Unit
The number of layers that a pallet contains. Only
levels (when
7 used if the pallet has no GTIN. It indicates the Hierarchy
4087 quantityOfLayersPerPallet pallet unit has Quantity
number of layers that a pallet contains, according to attribute
no GTIN
supplier or retailer preferences.
allocated)
Trade Unit
The number of trade items contained in a pallet.
levels (when
7 Only used if the pallet has no GTIN. It indicates the Hierarchy
4137 quantityOfTradeItemsPerPallet pallet unit has Quantity
number of trade items placed on a pallet according attribute
no GTIN
to supplier or retailer preferences.
allocated)
The number of complete layers contained in a higher
quantityOfCompleteLayersContain All levels
packaging configuration. Used in hierarchical Hierarchy
4064 7 except base Quantity
edInATradeItem packaging structure of a trade item. Cannot be used attribute
unit
for trade item base unit.
The number of trade items contained in a complete
quantityOfTradeItemsContainedInA All levels
layer of a higher packaging configuration. Used in Hierarchy
4113 7 except base Quantity
CompleteLayer hierarchical packaging structure of a trade item. attribute
unit
Cannot be used for trade item base unit.
All applicable
quantityOfNextLevelTrade Indicates the number of next lower level trade items
levels with Hierarchy
4214 7 contained within the physical non-coded grouping Quantity
ItemWithinInnerPack inner-pack attribute
(innerpack).
groupings
January 2008, Issue 2 - DRAFT All contents copyright © GS1 2008 Page 64 of 66
Data Quality Framework Including the Data Quality Protocol
Note: The “GDSN Package Measurement Rules for Data Alignment” should be used for correct measurement.
1
From the EAN.UCC Business Requirement Document for Data Synchronisation Data Model for Trade Item, version 7.7.1, May 24, 2005
2
Applicability as to the levels of the trade item hierarchy, including inner packs.
3
This indicates in which type of KPI is a specific attributed considered
4
To be inspected for existence only, however code 99999999 is not allowed.
5
For information purposes only.
6
Also referred to as length.
7
Please note that these hierarchy attributes do not apply at the same time to all items; please refer to the applicability of each attribute in
order to determine their relevance and usability for a specific item.
January 2008, Issue 2 - DRAFT All contents copyright © GS1 2008 Page 65 of 66
Data Quality Framework Including the Data Quality Protocol
Important: The KPI levels below apply to all products types regardless of their packaging type
or composition. Additionally, these KPI target levels are also applicable to all the different KPIs
defined on section 4.3
Score Meaning
Reasonably good data; obtaining a score of 95% or higher on all or individual KPIs
means that data is almost entirely reliable and that most trading partners are likely to
95% or higher
accept the information. Organisations with a score in this range may choose to work
closer to trading partners on specific opportunities in order to achieve 100% accuracy.
Obtaining a score between 75% and 95% indicates that the information has significant
problems, but that it is salvable data and could be improved if trading partners take the
From 75% to 95% right course of action. An organisation obtaining a score in this range is encouraged to
set immediate action to improve as well as committing to delivering results.
Some trading partners may choose to still accept this data at their discretion.
Poor quality data; obtaining less that 75% percent on all or individual KPIs means that
the data is mostly unreliable and that most trading partners are unlikely to accept the
Less than 75% data.
Organisations with a score in this range are strongly advised to fully revise their data
synchronisation and data quality programmes.