A

PROJECT REPORT

ON

STUDY ON DATA GOVERNANCE

AT

“DATAEAZE SYSTEMS”

SUBMITTED TO

SAVITRIBAI PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF
MASTER OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

SUBMITTED BY

Vitthal Govinda Shinde

UNDER THE GUIDENCE OF

DR. VIDYA BHANDWALKAR

DEPARTMENT OF MBA
DHOLE PATIL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING WAGHOLI, PUNE.
(2020-22)

1
 DHOLE PATIL EDUCATION SOCIETY’s
DHOLE PATIL COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
Accredited by NAAC with A+ Grade, An ISO 9001:2015 Certified
Institute
1284, Near Eon IT Park Kharadi, Dhole Patil College Road,
Wagholi, Pune-412207
Website: www.dpcoepune.edu.in E-mail: dpcoepune@gmail.com,
Phone:020-66059900

CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Vitthal Govinda Shinde is a bonafied student of Dhole Patil College of
Engineering, Pune pursuing Masters of Business Administration course of 2020-22, has
successfully completed her summer project titled “Study on Data Governance” at Dataeaze
Systems from DURATION DATE OF PROJECT.
This project is accomplished adequately and submitted in partial fulfillment of MBA
SPECIALIZATION curriculum as per the requirement of Savitribai Phule Pune University for
batch 2020-22.

Name Dr. Vidya Bhandwalkar Dr. Nihar Walimbe

Project Guide HOD, MBA Dept. Principal
Dhole Patil COE, Pune Dhole Patil COE, Pune Dhole Patil COE, Pune

2
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I take this responsibility to express my profound and sincere gratitude to SAVITRIBAI

PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY and DR. D. Y. PATIL SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT
for providing me with the opportunity to explore the corridors of the corporate world and
gather invaluable knowledge and practical experience via the Summer Internship Program.

It gives me immense pleasure to express my gratitude to all those individuals who were
associated with this project work. I have great pleasure to present this concise report on
“Study on Data Governance”, undertaken by me for two months in Dataeaze Systems as a
part of a fulfillment of MBA. I would also like to thank the HR manager ANKITA KALE
for his kind cooperation and giving me all necessary knowledge and support. I would also
like to thank all the employees of Dataeaze Systems for their valuable suggestions and
constant encouragement.

I would like to express my sincere gratitude to Dr. Vidya Bhandwalkar (Internal Project
Guide) of Dhole Patil College of Engineering, Pune who guided me how to carry on with
the project and also thankful to Dr. Vidya Bhandwalkar (HOD) for their able guidance and
support have been constant source of knowledge and motivation for me.

It gives me immense pleasure to express my gratitude to Dr. Nihar Walimbe, Principal of

Dhole Patil College of Engineering, Pune for giving me opportunity to do this project work.

At the last, I would like to thanks to all my batchmates who always encouraged and
supported me to complete this study successfully.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
M.B.A. (Human Resource Management)
Dhole Patil College of Engineering, Pune

3
 DECLARATION
I HEREBY DECLARE THAT THE PROJECT REPORT TITLED “Study on Data
Governance” IS GENUINE RESEARCH WORK UNDERTAKEN BY ME UNDER THE
GUIDANCE OF DR. VIDYA BHANDWALKAR.

THIS INFORMATION HAS BEEN COLLECTED FROM GENUINE AUTHENTIC

SOURCE.

THE REPORT IS BEING SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENT OF MASTERS OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION (MBA) FROM
SAVITRIBAI PHULE PUNE UNIVERSITY.

DATE: STUDENT NAME

PLACE:

4
SR NO. TITLE PAGE NO.

1. INTRODUCTION

2. OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

3. PROFILE OF THE ORGANIZATION

4. LITERATURE REVIEW

5. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

6. DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

7. FINDINGS & OBSERVATIONS

8. SUGGESTIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS

9. CONCLUSION

10 BIBLIOGRAPHY

ANNEXURE:

INDEX

5
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Data Governance (DG) is the process of managing the availability, usability, integrity and
security of the data in enterprise systems, based on internal data standards and policies that also
control data usage. Effective data governance ensures that data is consistent and trustworthy and
doesn't get misused. It's increasingly critical as organizations face new data privacy regulations
and rely more and more on data analytics to help optimize operations and drive business
decision-making.

A well-designed data governance program typically includes a governance team, a steering

committee that acts as the governing body, and a group of data stewards. They work together to
create the standards and policies for governing data, as well as implementation and enforcement
procedures that are primarily carried out by the data stewards. Executives and other
representatives from an organization's business operations take part, in addition to the IT
and data management teams.

While data governance is a core component of an overall data management strategy,

organizations should focus on the desired business outcomes of a governance program instead of
the data itself, Gartner analyst Andrew White wrote in a December 2019 blog post. This
comprehensive guide to data governance further explains what it is, how it works, the business
benefits it provides and the challenges of governing data. You'll also find an overview of data
governance software and related tools. Click through the hyperlinks to get expert advice and read
about data governance trends and best practices.

Why Data Governance Matters

Without effective data governance, data inconsistencies in different systems across an

organization might not get resolved. For example, customer names may be listed differently in
sales, logistics and customer service systems. That could complicate data integration efforts and
create data integrity issues that affect the accuracy of business intelligence (BI), enterprise

6
reporting and analytics applications. In addition, data errors might not be identified and fixed,
further affecting BI and analytics accuracy.

Poor data governance can also hamper regulatory compliance initiatives, which could cause
problems for companies that need to comply with new data privacy and protection laws, such as
the European Union's GDPR and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). An enterprise
data governance program typically results in the development of common data definitions and
standard data formats that are applied in all business systems, boosting data consistency for both
business and compliance uses.

Data Governance Goals and Benefits

A key goal of data governance is to break down data silos in an organization. Such silos
commonly build up when individual business units deploy separate transaction processing
systems without centralized coordination or an enterprise data architecture. Data governance
aims to harmonize the data in those systems through a collaborative process, with stakeholders
from the various business units participating.

Another data governance goal is to ensure that data is used properly, both to avoid introducing
data errors into systems and to block potential misuse of personal data about customers and other
sensitive information. That can be accomplished by creating uniform policies on the use of data,
along with procedures to monitor usage and enforce the policies on an ongoing basis. In addition,
data governance can help to strike a balance between data collection practices and privacy
mandates.

Besides more accurate analytics and stronger regulatory compliance, the benefits that data
governance provides include improved data quality; lower data management costs; and increased
access to needed data for data scientists, other analysts and business users. Ultimately, data
governance can help improve business decision-making by giving executives better information.
Ideally, that will lead to competitive advantages and increased revenue and profits. Read more
about the benefits of a successful data governance strategy and how to build one in an article by
data management consultant Andy Hayler.

7
Who's responsible for Data Governance?

In most organizations, various people are involved in the data governance process. That includes
business executives, data management professionals and IT staffers, as well as end users who are
familiar with relevant data domains in an organization's systems. These are the key participants
and their primary governance responsibilities.

Chief Data Officer

The chief data officer (CDO), if there is one, often is the senior executive who oversees a data
governance program and has high-level responsibility for its success or failure. The CDO's role
includes securing approval, funding and staffing for the program, playing a lead role in setting it
up, monitoring its progress and acting as an advocate for it internally. If an organization doesn't
have a CDO, another C-suite executive usually will serve as an executive sponsor and handle the
same functions.

Data governance manager and team

In some cases, the CDO or an equivalent executive -- a director of enterprise data management,
for example -- may also be the hands-on data governance program manager. In others,
organizations appoint a data governance manager or lead specifically to run the program. Either
way, the program manager typically heads a data governance team that works on the program
full time. Sometimes more formally known as the data governance office, it coordinates the
process, leads meetings and training sessions, tracks metrics, manages internal communications
and carries out other management tasks.

Data Governance Committee

The governance team usually doesn't make policy or standards decisions, though. That's the
responsibility of the data governance committee or council, which is primarily made up of
business executives and other data owners. The committee approves the foundational data
governance policy and associated policies and rules on things like data access and usage, plus the

8
procedures for implementing them. It also resolves disputes, such as disagreements between
different business units over data definitions and formats.

Data Stewards

The responsibilities of data stewards include overseeing data sets to keep them in order. They're
also in charge of ensuring that the policies and rules approved by the data governance committee
are implemented and that end users comply with them. Workers with knowledge of particular
data assets and domains are generally appointed to handle the data stewardship role. That's a full-
time job in some companies and a part-time position in others; there can also be a mix of IT and
business data stewards.

Data architects, data modelers and data quality analysts and engineers are also part of the
governance process. In addition, business users and analytics teams must be trained on data
governance policies and data standards so they can avoid using data in erroneous or improper
ways. You can learn more about data governance roles and responsibilities and how to structure
a governance program in a related article.

Components of a Data Governance Framework

A data governance framework consists of the policies, rules, processes, organizational structures
and technologies that are put in place as part of a governance program. It also spells out things
such as a mission statement for the program, its goals and how its success will be measured, as
well as decision-making responsibilities and accountability for the various functions that will be
part of the program. An organization's governance framework should be documented and shared
internally to show how the program will work, so that's clear to everyone involved upfront.

On the technology side, data governance software can be used to automate aspects of managing a

governance program. While data governance tools aren't a mandatory framework component,
they support program and workflow management, collaboration, development of governance
policies, process documentation, the creation of data catalogs and other functions. They can also

9
be used in conjunction with data quality, metadata management and master data management
(MDM) tools.

Data Governance Implementation

The initial step in implementing a data governance framework involves identifying the owners or
custodians of the different data assets across an enterprise and getting them or designated
surrogates involved in the governance program. The CDO, executive sponsor or dedicated data
governance manager then takes the lead in creating the program's structure, working to staff the
data governance team, identify data stewards and formalize the governance committee.

Once the structure is finalized, the real work begins. The data governance policies and data
standards must be developed, along with rules that define how data can be used by authorized
personnel. Moreover, a set of controls and audit procedures are needed to ensure
ongoing compliance with internal policies and external regulations and guarantee that data is
used in a consistent way across applications. The governance team should also document where
data comes from, where it's stored and how it's protected from mishaps and security attacks.

Data governance initiatives usually also include the following elements.

Data mapping and classification. Mapping the data in systems helps document data assets and
how data flows through an organization. Different data sets can then be classified based on
factors such as whether they contain personal information or other sensitive data. The
classifications influence how data governance policies are applied to individual data sets.

Business glossary. A business glossary contains definitions of business terms and concepts used
in an organization -- for example, what constitutes an active customer. By helping to establish a
common vocabulary for business data, business glossaries can aid governance efforts.

Data catalog. Data catalogs collect metadata from systems and use it to create an indexed
inventory of available data assets that includes information on data lineage, search functions and
collaboration tools. Information about data governance policies and automated mechanisms for

10
enforcing them can also be built into catalogs. Consultant Anne Marie Smith details the key steps
for building a data catalog.

Best practices for Managing Data Governance Initiatives

To the extent that data governance may impose strictures on how data is handled and used, it can
become controversial in organizations. A common concern among IT and data management
teams is that they'll be seen as the "data police" by business users if they lead data governance
programs. To promote user, buy-in and avoid resistance to governance policies, experienced data
governance managers and industry consultants recommend that programs be business-driven,
with data owners involved and the governance committee making the decisions on standards,
policies and rules.

"Only by agreeing to corporate-wide data governance with responsibility by business units will
the foundations be laid for successful data management across the enterprise," Hayler wrote in an
article about the need to eliminate incompatible data silos.

Training and education on data governance is a necessary component of initiatives, particularly

to familiarize business users and data analysts with data usage rules, privacy mandates and their
responsibility for helping to keep data sets consistent. Ongoing communication with corporate
executives, business managers and end users about the progress of a data governance program is
also a must, via a combination of reports, email newsletters, workshops and other outreach
methods.

In a report published in October 2019, Gartner analyst Saul Judah listed these seven foundations
for successfully governing data and analytics applications:

 a focus on business value and organizational outcomes;

 internal agreement on data accountability and decision rights;
 a trust-based governance model that relies on data lineage and curation;
 transparent decision-making that hews to a set of ethical principles;
 risk management and data security included as core governance components;
 ongoing education and training, with mechanisms to monitor their effectiveness; and

11
  a collaborative culture and governance process that encourages broad participation.

Professional associations that promote best practices in data governance processes include
DAMA International and the Data Governance Professionals Organization. The Data
Governance Institute, an organization founded in 2004 by then-consultant Gwen Thomas,
published a data governance framework template and a variety of guidance on governance best
practices. It's no longer active, but the information is still available on its website. Similar
guidance is also available elsewhere -- for example, in the Data Management University online
library maintained by consultancy EW Solutions.

Data Governance Challenges

Often, the early steps in data governance efforts can be the most difficult because it's
characteristic that different parts of an organization have diverging views of key enterprise data
entities, such as customers or products. These differences must be resolved as part of the data
governance process -- for example, by agreeing on common data definitions and formats. That
can be a fraught and fractious undertaking, which is why the data governance committee needs a
clear dispute-resolution procedure.

Other common challenges that organizations face on data governance include the following.

Demonstrating its business value. That often starts at the very beginning: "It can be a real
struggle to get your data governance initiative approved in the first place," data governance
consultant and trainer Nicola Askham wrote in a September 2019 blog post. To help build a
business case for a data governance program, Askham recommended that proponents document
data quality horror stories and tie the expected outcomes of the program to specific corporate
priorities.

On an ongoing basis, demonstrating business value requires the development of quantifiable

metrics, particularly on data quality improvements. That could include the number of data errors
resolved on a quarterly basis and the revenue gains or cost savings that result from them. Other
common data quality metrics measure accuracy and error rates in data sets and related attributes
such as data completeness and consistency. Read more about the close ties between data

12
governance and data quality, plus other kinds of metrics that can also be used to show the value
of a governance program.

Supporting self-service analytics. The self-service BI and analytics movement has created new
data governance challenges by putting data in the hands of more users in organizations.
Governance programs must make sure data is accurate and accessible for self-service users,
while also ensuring that those users -- business analysts, executives and citizen data scientists,
among others -- don't misuse data or run afoul of data privacy and security restrictions.
Streaming data that's used for real-time analytics further complicates those efforts.

Governing big data. The deployment of big data systems also adds new governance needs and
challenges. Data governance programs traditionally focused on structured data stored in
relational databases, but now they must deal with the mix of structured, unstructured and semi-
structured data that big data environments typically contain, as well as a variety of data
platforms, including Hadoop and Spark systems, No SQL databases and cloud object stores.
Also, sets of big data are often stored in raw form in data lakes and then filtered as needed for
analytics uses. A related article offers more details on the challenges and advice on best practices
for big data governance.

Key data governance pillars

Data governance programs are underpinned by several other facets of the overall data
management process. Most notably, that includes the following:

 Data stewardship. As discussed earlier, an essential responsibility of the data steward is to

be accountable for a portion of an organization's data, with job duties in areas such as data
quality, security and usage. Teams of data stewards typically are formed to help guide and
execute the implementation of data governance policies. Often, they're data-savvy business
users who are subject matter experts in their domains, although data steward can also be an
IT position. Data stewards collaborate with data quality analysts, database administrators and
other data management professionals, while also working with business units to identify data
requirements and issues. In his December 2019 blog post, Gartner's White also pointed to an

13
 emerging need for analytics stewardship that would handle similar functions specifically for
analytics systems, calling it "a missing link in analytics, BI and data science."

 Data quality. Data quality improvement is one of the biggest driving forces behind data
governance activities. Data accuracy, completeness and consistency across systems are
crucial hallmarks of successful governance initiatives. Data cleansing, also known as data
scrubbing, is a common data quality element. It fixes data errors and inconsistencies and also
correlates and removes duplicate instances of the same data elements, thus harmonizing the
various ways in which the same customer or product may be listed in systems. Data quality
tools provide those capabilities through data profiling, parsing and matching functions,
among other features. Get tips on managing data quality efforts in an article by managed
services strategist and consultant Chris Foot.

 Master data management. MDM is another data management discipline that's closely

associated with data governance processes. MDM initiatives establish a master set of data on
customers, products and other business entities to help ensure that the data is consistent in
different systems across an organization. As a result, MDM naturally dovetails with data
governance. Like governance programs, though, MDM efforts can create controversy in
organizations because of differences between departments and business units on how to
format master data. In addition, MDM's complexity has limited its adoption compared to data
governance. But the combination of the two has led to a shift toward smaller-scale MDM
projects driven by data governance goals, as explained in a separate article.

 Data governance use cases. Effective data governance is at the heart of managing the data
used in operational systems and the BI and analytics applications fed by data warehouses,
data marts and data lakes. It's also a particularly important component of digital
transformation initiatives, and it can aid in other corporate processes, such as risk
management, business process management, and mergers and acquisitions. As data uses
continue to expand and new technologies emerge, data governance is likely to gain even
wider application. For example, efforts are underway to apply data governance processes to
machine learning algorithms and other AI tools. Also, high-profile data breaches and laws
like GDPR and the California Consumer Privacy Act have made data protection and privacy
more central to governance efforts. Compliance with the GDPR and CCPA privacy

14
 directives is another new use case for data governance -- Hayler offers advice on building
privacy protections into governance policies to meet those requirements.

Data governance vendors and tools

Data governance tools are available from various vendors. That includes major IT vendors, such
as IBM, Informatica, Information Builders, Oracle, SAP and SAS Institute, as well as data
management specialists like Adaptive, ASG Technologies, Ataccama, Collibra, Erwin, Infogix
and Talent. In most cases, the governance tools are offered as part of larger suites that also
incorporate metadata management features and data lineage functionality.

Data Management Vs Data Governance: IT Practice That Supports Business Strategy

If there’s anything that’s defining successful businesses today, it’s the successful understanding,
use, and strategy of a company’s data.

Understanding your data and determining how to implement it brings up a whole range of
questions, from both users and stakeholders: how is the data stored? How do we know it’s timely
and accurate? Can we trust it? What is the best data for my problem?

Answers to these questions aren’t easy, but a couple fields provide ways to organize and solve
them: data management and data governance. Though these terms are often used
interchangeably, they are entirely different programs. In this article, we’re clearing up any
confusing about data management and data governance.

Data management: an IT practice

Let’s start with the more basic piece – data management. After all, if you don’t have solid data
management in place, the rest of the data world is a beyond your reach.

Data management is best seen as an IT program, whose goal is to organize and control your data
resources so that it is accessible, reliable, and timely whenever users call on it.

15
Viewed from this administrative perspective, the IT teams responsible for data management may
rely on a comprehensive, customized collection of practices, theories, processes, and systems –
an entire suite of tools – that collect, validate, store, organize, protect, process, and otherwise
maintain data. After all, if data isn’t treated appropriately, the data can become corrupt or
unusable, becoming completely useless.

Importantly, data management encompasses the entire lifecycle of a data asset, from the very
initial creation of the data to the final retirement of the data.

Data management can include many related fields and categories, including any of the following
as relevant to your company:

 Data governance and data stewardship

 Data architecture
 Data quality management
 Data warehousing
 Business intelligence and analytics
 Metadata management
 Data security management

Data Governance: A Business Strategy

If data management is the logistics of data, data governance is the strategy of data.

Data governance should feel bigger and more holistic than data management because it is: as an
important business program, governance requires policy, best reached by consensus across the
company.

The purpose of data governance is to provide tangible answers to how a company can determine
and prioritize the financial benefits of data while mitigating the business risks of poor data. Data
governance requires determining what data can be used in what scenarios–which

16
requires determining exactly what acceptable data is: what is data, where is it collected and used,
how accurate must it be, which rules must it follow, who is involved in various parts of data?
Importantly, data governance must go beyond IT and include stakeholders from across the
enterprise. In order to ensure the safety, reliability, and trustworthiness of all data, governance
requires that stakeholders from all business areas be involved. Consider the alternative: if each
business silo approaches their data strategy differently, the end result is chaotic and, likely, not
comprehensive enough to be useful.
Determining your data governance can include a wide range of processes, practices, and theories.
It is likely to overlap with many data areas, like security, compliance, privacy, usability and
integration. The end result may be some system that determines the decision rights and
accountably of processes and individuals, like which data processes, are used when, and which
people can take certain actions under specific circumstances.

The ultimate goal is to determine a holistic way to control data assets, so that the company can
get the absolute most value from the data.

A good way to determine data governance? It is not defined by technology. Instead, technology

should support data governance through automation, scaling, and augmentation.
Data governance starts as a theory (or several), but it can become tangible through the creation of
the following:

 Data quality definitions, which determines the condition of the data, as well as its
trustworthiness and adherence to data policies
 A business glossary, which records the meaning of all data, ensuring clarity and preventing
unnecessary repetition
 Roles and responsibilities, which provides an organizational structure to who cares for and
maintains which data
 Governed data catalogs, which serves to locate and facilitate understanding of the data.
More advanced catalogs may even group data into various related collections, based on how
previous users have accessed the data, which can provide additional meaning and insight
and organization.

17
  Metadata creation, which links technical processes to specific data implementation, as well
as anything that produces, uses, or influences data. This can even track the “lineage” of data,
or the relationships of data across different sections, such as data within similar meanings,
business processes data, and data specific to departments, business units, applications, other
products, and even internal or external geographies.

Many experts in data governance also recommend a way for data systems to be organized to
promote active participation from company employees, for instance. This may allow users to
indicate when data is incorrect or fix it directly, which promotes both better-quality data but also
trust that the data is strong and accurate.

Benefits of Data Governance

Once your data management processes are established, data governance is a logical next step
because of the many benefits such guidance can provide, including:

 Increasing the value of your company’s data

 Decreasing costs within other subsets of data management, by knowing what you’ll focus on
and what you’re choosing to skip
 Increasing enterprise revenue overall
 Standardizing data systems, policies, and procedures
 Ensuring correct regulation and compliance procedures
 Helping to solve issues with data
 Promoting transparency
 Establishing training and education around data

Data management and data governance are not the same things, in concept or in practice, but
they are both essential to ensure the successful and valuable use of data in your company.

Data Governance Bodies

18
Ultimately, data governance is a business responsibility. It must be endorsed by senior executive
management. It must be led by executive management. It must require involvement by business
unit representatives to make sure that data is properly identified and defined, made fit for
purpose and used appropriately. While the Data Governance Office as the facilitator, enabler and
implementer of data governance sits within the Office of the CIO, the responsibility for
enterprise data governance resides with executive management. Enterprise Data Management
follows from Enterprise Data Governance.

Executive Management Core

The Executive Management Core (EMC) team establishes the business vision, mission and
priorities of the Department. It resolves data governance and data management priorities against
other organizational priorities. Led by the Commissioner, it is the ultimate governance body

Data Governance Executive Board

The Data Governance Executive Board (DGEB) is responsible for approving data governance
and data management policies, resolving data governance issues presented by the Data
Stewardship Council and prioritizing enterprise data management efforts and initiatives. The
DGEB is led by the Commissioner and consists of members of the extended Executive
Management team. The DGEB serves as the de facto executive sponsor of the enterprise data
governance and management program

Data Stewardship Council

The Data Stewardship Council (DSC) is responsible for defining enterprise data, developing data
management policies, and guiding enterprise information architecture and data management
efforts. Ultimately, its responsibility is to help the enterprise improve the competing dimensions
of data quality, accessibility, security, and value. The DSC is led by the CIO/EDGO and consists
of the Enterprise Data Architect, the Data Integration Director, the Business Intelligence
Director, enterprise Chief Data Stewards, supervisors from the Department’s various analytic
and IT development units and business unit data stewards

19
Data Mining

Data mining is the process of analyzing data from different sources and summarizing it into
relevant information that can be used to help increase revenue and decrease costs. Its primary
purpose is to find correlations or patterns among dozens of fields in large databases.

Data mining software is one of many analytical tools for reading data, allowing users to view
data from many different angles, categorize it, and sum up the relationships identified. The
ultimate goal of data mining is prediction and discovery. The process searches for consistent
patterns and systematic relationships between variables, and then validates the findings by
applying the patterns to new subsets of data.

Data mining consists of five major elements:

I. Extract, transform, and load transaction data onto the data warehouse

II. Store and manage the data in a multidimensional database system

III. Provide data access to business analysts and IT professionals

IV. Analyze the data by application software

V. Present the data in a useful format (graph, table, etc.)

The process of data mining is simple and consists of three stages. The initial exploration stage
usually starts with data preparation which involves cleaning out data, transforming data, and
selecting subsets of records and data sets with large number of variables. Then, identifying
relevant variables and determining the complexity of models must be done to elaborate
exploratory analyses using a wide variety of graphical and statistical methods.

In the modern era, businesses are continually looking for a competitive advantage—something
that will allow them to deliver goods or services at a lower cost, higher quality, and faster speed
than their competitors. The path to doing so begins with the quality and volume of data they are
able to collect.

20
Data drives everything in the business world, from manufacturing to supply chain logistics to
retail sales to customer experience to post-sale marketing and beyond, data holds the secrets to
making processes more efficient, production costs cheaper, profit margins higher and marketing
campaigns more effective.

But data alone is not the answer—without a means to interact with the data and extract
meaningful insight, it’s essentially useless.

21
 CHAPTER 2

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Data management solutions on their own are becoming very expensive and not able to cope with
the reality of everlasting data complexity. Businesses have grown more sophisticated in their use
of data, which drives new demands that require different ways to handle this data. Forward-
thinking organizations believe that the only way to solve the data problem will be the
implementation of an effective data governance. Attempts in governing data failed before, as
they were driven by IT, and affected by rigid processes and fragmented activities carried out on
system-by-system basis. Up to very recently governance is mostly informal with very ambiguous
and generic regulations, in siloes around specific enterprise repositories, lacking structure and the
wider support of the organization. Despite its highly recognized importance, the area of data
governance is still under developed and under researched.

Since data governance is still under researched, there is need to advance research in data
governance in order to deepen practice. Currently, what exist are mostly descriptive literature
reviews in the area of data governance.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

To identify how are the data usage of Dataeaze Systems performing today.
To review how effectively Dataeaze Systems is using data governance at present.
To identify how data governance has helped Dataeaze Systems to take keep records.
To evaluate the role of data governance to Align data security architecture frameworks

SCOPE OF THE STUDY

The desire to improve the quality and usability of the data is the main driver for this type of data
governance. It is sometimes initiated by merger and acquisition activities within an organization.
Major revenue generating business objectives including cross-sale and up-sale can raise the data
quality priority. It is likely that quality efforts are initially applied to master data. These types of
programs normally involve data quality software including data profiling, cleansing, and

22
matching engines. They may begin with an enterprise focus, or efforts may be local to a
department or a project

Effective data governance does not come together all at once. Before adopting an approach, it is
important to assess the current state maturity of the data governance capability. Below is a
diagram that depicts the Data Governance Maturity models with 6 major miles’ stones: None,
Initial, Managed, Standardized, Advanced, and Optimized.

23
 CHAPTER 3

PROFILE OF THE ORGANIZATION

Dataeaze systems is focused on making it easy for organizations to work with data. Dataeaze
helps its customers build an analytics data platform around modern big data ecosystem.
Organizations assisted by Dataeaze get benefit of quick bring up of robust data platform with
analytics capabilities brought up as per need. This data platform enables full set of data analytics
capabilities like Scheduled ETL, interactive data processing, BI and real time stream analysis.

We help organizations build "Data Driven" software products, by incorporating domain

knowledge and leveraging machine learning. With artificial intelligence and deep learning
techniques, we build "software 2.0" data pipelines for all kinds of data -- streaming or big data,
structured or unstructured.

End to end data lake bring up and maintenance

Bring up an enterprise grade robust and scalable hadoop big data lake and reporting data mart
Suitable to your use cases and data scale needs. Resolve source data complexity and bring your
existing data on board maintain this platform to make sure use cases are served on time

Implement data engineering automation

Setup automated data ingestion pipeline. Design and build reporting data mart. Build ETL
workflows as per analytics requirements

Implement data analytics use cases

24
Analyse your data, your use case needs Architect, implement end to end ETL + interactive data
store load + API layer Make MIS reporting, Machine Learning and Real Time reporting possible
on this platform.

Dataeaze - core expertise (Techniques)

Data Management

 Data Wrangling
 Data Analytics
 Data Visualization
 Data Mining
 Data Pipelines

Core Computer Science

 Algorithms
 Data Structures
 Graph And Networks
 Databases
 Operating Systems

Machine Learning

 Deep Learning
 Kernel Methods
 Forests, Ensembles, Boosting
 Clustering
 Collaborative Filtering
 Dimensionality Reduction

Artificial Intelligence

 Computer Vision
 Natural Language Processing
 Information Retrieval
 Speech Recognition

25
  Machine Translation

Systems / Computing

 Parallel Computing
 Distributed Computing
 GPU
 Cloud Computing
 Edge Computing
 Embedded Devices

Software Engineering

 Software Product Design

 Software Development
 Technical Evaluation
 Production Deployment
 ML Software Lifecycle Management

Dataeaze - Core Expertise (Tools)

Data Management

Python, Julia, R, jupyter, pandas, pyspark, numpy, matplotlib, seaborn, streamlit, Kafka

Core Computer Science

C, C++, Python,Java, Scala, NetworkX, igraph, MySQL, PostgreSQL, Linux, Mac, Windows

Machine Learning

PyTorch, Tensorflow, Keras, scikit-learn, XGBoost, LightGBM

Artificial Intelligence

OpenCV, dlib. scikit-image, nltk, SpaCy, faiss, flann, kaldi, sphinx, librosa

Systems / Computing

26
OpenMP, MPI, Spark, CUDA, AWS, GCloud, Azure, Mosquitto, Paho, Jetson Nano

Software Engineering

Docker, Git, JIRA, Trello, MLOps toolkits

Ongoing Projects

Deep Learning powered Intrusion Detection

We have designed and developed the AI/ML software stack for a intrusion detection solution for
a defence application. The hallmark of the solution is the application of computer vision and
deep learning techniques to spatio-temporal signals to a completely different domain -- fiber
optics. In doing so, we have built possibly one-of-its-kind "third generation" artificial
intelligence system for this problem -- where the need for feature engineering is eliminated.

Area - fiber optics, deep learning, computer vision, defence

MLOps

We developed a DevOps toolkit for machine learning. For a machine learning engineer, it offers
automl with hyperparameter tuning as well as experiment tracking. Code, model and data
versions for all experiments can be tracked. It provides minimum code change workflow along
with visual "big picture" view, while not compromising on scalability and applicability to wide
set of machine learning algorithms.

Area - MLOps, productivity, automation

Machine learning for telecom

We are applying machine learning techniques to build a software product that aims to reduce the
time and efforts spent by NOC engineers in diagnosing faults in a telecom network. The software
helps telecom operators to improve service assurance and helps the Telcom service providers to
reduce their operational costs

Area - machine learning, telecom

CHAPTER 4

27
 LITERATURE REVIEW

The management of data is important to many organizations as advances in IT enables

organizations to capture structured and unstructured data (Lee, 2000). The literature also
revealed emerging issues related to management of data and data quality. Wright (2006) stated
that the confidence of the decision maker in the data is characterized by the quality of the data.
The viewpoint that data is a valuable resource has grown increasingly prevalent among business
and IT executives. Recognition of data as corporate assets imply that some form of data
governance would be beneficial for effective data management (Wright, 2006). Lee (2000) and
Newman (2005) identified similar issues relating to data management and enterprise information
management (EIM).

Newman (2006) conducted research in EIM programs and identified EIM governance scored the
lowest compared to all other types of EIM programs. Newman (2006) concluded that
organizations need guidance to incorporate EIM governance into their software development
methodology. He also found that companies surveyed in the US, UK and Europe are more aware
of EIM governance than other companies in Asia Pacific. His research shows that there is a lack
of awareness of the importance of using logical data model during initiation phase for scoping,
assessing data quality, consulting data steward, records retention policies, and saving,
cataloguing and reusing project metadata. In another study by Newman (2005), he found that the
management of information is unfocused and undisciplined. He highlighted the following
problems; (1) costly, redundant and resource hungry integration projects, (2) data and
information sources that are not rationalized, and (3) inflexible system design that does not cater
for changing business needs. The above observations were accentuated by organizations moving
towards service-oriented architecture (SOA). SOA is characterized by decoupling of data,
processes and applications that magnified the need for authoritative source of the information
(master data stores); information location, structure, context and usage (metadata management);
semantic reconciliation; profiling and ensuring data quality; data integration method (data
exchange); and the ability to encapsulate an information model to support various business
processes (Newman, 2005).

The importance of Data Quality

28
According to Bair (2004), data quality can be defined by data type and domain, correctness and
completeness, uniqueness and referential integrity, consistency across all databases, freshness
and timeliness, and business rules conformance. In order to determine that the data is ‘fit for
purpose’, like Bair, Olson (2003) defines 6 data quality dimensions of accuracy, timeliness,
relevance, completeness, understood and trusted.

Data quality is important to businesses in order to leverage IT initiatives such as data mining and
warehousing for business intelligence (Freidman, 2006). Olson (2003) associated poor data
quality with the increase in cost and the complexity of developing customer relationship
management (CRM), supply chain management (SCM) and enterprise resource planning (ERP)
systems. The success of such IT investments depends a lot on the quality of the source data. The
saying ‘Garbage in, Garbage Out’ is most applicable in this situation. Wadehra (2006) also
emphasized the need to create the ‘single truth’ of the data in cases where data is stored in
various disparate databases. It is apparent that effective business intelligence leads to effective
decision making (Friedman, 2006) with a trajectory to increase productivity as a result of less
rework (Olson, 2003). This will also allow for regulatory compliance by providing complete,
accurate and timely data.

The effectiveness of any IT initiatives depends on the quality of the data. The reports generated
and decisions made can only be as good as the quality of data. The issues surrounding data
quality or the lack of quality are compounded by the fact that (1) data is spread across disparate
systems within an organization, (2) data is collected, maintained and used by various levels of an
organization, and (3) many system development methodologies do not incorporate data quality
assurance.

The abovementioned data quality issues can be addressed by having an effective master data
management. Effective master data management ensures good data quality through the use of a
data governance program. Data governance program gives data managers the mandate to manage
the data quality as an enterprise asset (Russom, 2006).

IT Governance and Data Governance

In recent years, publicly traded American companies are required to comply with Sarbanes-
Oxley (SOX) Act of 2002. This was enacted after the collapse of Enron in 2001. It requires

29
executives of publicly traded companies to be held personally responsible for the creditability of
the financial reporting supplied to the shareholders. Section 302 of SOX compliance is directly
related to IT (Brown and Nasuti, 2005) as most businesses engage in e-business. This requires IT
infrastructure to be managed in a transparent, accountable manner and proof that internal
controls are in place to prevent fraudulent activities. SOX compliance had brought about the
introduction of Control Objectives for Information and Related Technology (COBIT) as the
generally accepted framework for IT auditors to assess SOX compliance. The financial reporting
process in COBIT is based on an internal control of the COSO framework (Hawkins, Alhajjaj&
Kelley, 2003). COSO was introduced in 1992 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of
the Treadway Commission, a management framework for internal controls. Table 1 shows the
relationship between data and the five components of internal control as stipulated by the COSO
framework (Marinos, 2004b).

It can be concluded that the success of the COBIT framework depends on the quality of the
underlying corporate data. This is supported by Marinos (2004b), who states that “data quality is
the hidden assumption behind COSO”. This shows that in addition to IT governance there is a
need for data governance framework for effective data management.

Data Governance

In order to address data quality issues, Friedman (2006) recommends that organizations adopt a
holistic approach, focusing on “people, processes and technology” and organizations need to
constantly quantify and measure their data quality. This implies that in order to address data
quality issues, data needs to be governed. According to Thomas (2006), “data needs to be
governed as it has neither will nor intent of its own. Tools and people shape the data and tell it
where to go. Therefore, data governance is the governance of people and technology”.

There are various definitions of data governance. Cohen (2006) defines data governance as “the
process by which a company manages the quantity, consistency, usability, security and
availability of data”. Newman and Logan (2006) define data governance as “the collection of
decision rights, processes, standards, policies and technologies required to manage, maintain and
exploit information as an enterprise resource”.

30
Thomas (2006) states that data governance “refers to the organizational bodies, rules, decision
rights, and accountabilities of people and information systems as they perform information-
related processes”. She goes on to state “data governance sets the rules of engagement that
management will follow as the organization uses data”.

In light of the above definitions, data governance is important because it defines policies and
procedures to ensure proactive and effective data management. The adoption of a data
governance framework also enables collaboration from various levels of the organizations to
manage enterprise-wide data and it provides the ability to align various data related programs
with corporate objectives.

Who should drive the Data Governance Program?

Should IT or business drive the data governance program? Should IT governance incorporate the
governance of data as well? The COBIT framework incorporates financial reporting component
from the COSO framework (Hawkins, Alhajjaj & Kelley, 2003). This implies that data quality is
important for preparing accurate financial reporting. The Chief Executive Officers and Chief
Financial Officers are held accountable over the credibility of these financial reports. Therefore,
it is the business’ responsibility to ensure that the data is correct, available, reliable, and fit for
purpose. IT is responsible for the infrastructure that holds, processes and reports on the data.
These infrastructures have to be built with capabilities for preventing data being used
fraudulently

However, this only relates to financial data. What about other business-related data, such as,
customer data, supplier data, or spatial data? The quality of these data is also important for the
business. Therefore, it seems logical that data governance program should be driven by the
business as the business uses the data to make decisions. Therefore, the business should control
the data, determine who can access the data and the context that it should be used (Thomas,
2005).

IT governance ensures that the IT infrastructure aligns with business objectives and utilized cost
effectively (Luftman, 2004). Therefore, the governance of IT infrastructure (the pipe) should be
the responsibility of IT and the data (the information that flows through the pipe) should be the
business’ responsibility. This indicates that there is a need for IT and business to work together

31
(the need to build the pipe to carry the data) to align data and IT initiatives (Dember, 2006). It is
imperative that organizations realize the critical success factors of data governance.

Data Governance Critical Success Factors

Critical success factors for data governance can be determined by addressing the top 10
corporate oversights identified by Marinos (2004a). They are:

Accountability and strategic accountability there is a need for executive leadership to drive data
governance process. Cohen (2006) and Thomas (2006) stress that in order to implement data
governance successfully, the roles and responsibilities for various people in the organizations
who are involved in the data governance process need to be clearly defined.

• Standards. Definition of data standards is important as corporate data needs to be defined and
made sure that it is ‘fit for purpose’.

• Managerial blind spot. There is a need for the alignment of data specific technology, process
and organization bodies with business objectives.

• Embracing complexity. Data stakeholders are the producers and consumers of data. The data
stakeholder management is complex as data could be collected, enriched, distributed, consumed
and maintained by different data stakeholders.

• Cross divisional issue. The data governance structure must be designed in such a way that it
includes participation from all levels of the organization to reconcile priorities, expedite conflict
resolution and encourage the support of data quality.

• Metrics. Definition of outcome specific data quality metrics is important for measuring data
governance success.

• Partnership. When an organization shares data with other organizations (partner) there is a
requirement for its partner to be held accountable for its data quality so that the data management
efforts of both organizations are not undermined

• Choosing strategic points of control. Controls need to be put in place to determine where and
when quality of the data is to be assessed and addressed.

32
• Compliance monitoring. Data management policies and procedures need to be assessed
periodically in order to ensure that the policies and procedures are being followed.

• Training and awareness. Data stakeholders need to be aware of the value of data governance.
The importance of data quality and the benefits of quality data need to be communicated to all
data stakeholders in order to raise their awareness

Concepts of Data Storage and operations

Four different types of data storage and operations will be taken into account since they could
support effective Data Governance. The first concept is a so-called Data Lake, which represents
a company’s huge collection of all data sources or data sets in their raw format. It can be seen as
a storage repository that uses dynamic analytical applications, with a massive scalability that can
hold a huge amount of raw data in their native format and is stored until it is used for further
operations. It also describes the processing systems which receive the raw data and keep the
original data structure. Therefore, various data formats can be found in this repository, with
every element having a unique identifier and metadata tags. One advantage is that it can cope
with vast volumes of unstructured data that arrive very fast in the organization, and are
accessible immediately after their creation. So, the idea of a Data Lake is to derive further
insights from these data. In contrast, pre-built static data warehouses are established to store
highly structured and slowly changing data

In contrast to Data Lakes, Data Spaces are an organization-wide concept which model the
relationship of different data repositories, thus connecting a variety of data formats stored in
different locations. However, the concept of Data Spaces exists longer than Data Lakes, there is
not much literature available which focuses on it.

In contrast, the concept of Linked Data is to create structured data that can be integrated and
interchanged within an organization. It follows the idea of standard web technologies, which is to
connect and query different data from various sources. Enterprise Linked Data describes the
technologies and principles that allow enterprises to integrate their data in a flexible way, by
following a bottom-up approach. This can result in internal and external values, such as a more
efficient integration of the supply chain or cooperative engineering. Consequently, companies

33
can benefit from this approach as they are able to combine their data much easier and therefore
gain more knowledge from them, by saving time and transaction costs at the same time

With the help of Linked Data, organizations can have their data landscape better under control
and are also aware of their processes and organizational attributes. Concrete results can be seen
in the improvement of governing corporate data assets and increasing their quality. With the
growth of the systems, the diverse relationships support the understanding of how the various
data are related to different parties, systems or initiatives through modeling their complex
relations via ontologies. An ontology-based linked data technique is used by DeStefano et al.
(2016) in order to strengthen the awareness and quality of the data. Another way to represent
Linked Data is with the Resource Description Framework (RDF), which is a flexible graph that
can be adopted at different levels within an organization. Depending on the actual level,
employees can access various levels of detail. Its effectiveness has been evaluated in some
experiments and cases. In fact, also a white paper states that taxonomies and classifications from
the search world are useful to be implemented in business practice

According to Soares (2012), Data Governance principles can also be applied on Big Data. Big
Data is a commonly well-known term which can be defined as such a high amount of data that is
not possible to be processed with the help of a single standard device. Currently, companies of
all sizes are faced with ever increasing amounts of data. In order to remain efficient and reliable,
these data have to be governed, managed, analyzed and visualized in an appropriate way to take
actions necessary for doing business successfully, for example with the support of Data
Scientists.

According to Soares (2012), Data Governance principles can also be applied on Big Data. Big
Data is a commonly well-known term which can be defined as such a high amount of data that is
not possible to be processed with the help of a single standard device. Currently, companies of
all sizes are faced with ever increasing amounts of data. In order to remain efficient and reliable,
these data have to be governed, managed, analyzed and visualized in an appropriate way to take
actions necessary for doing business successfully, for example with the support of Data
Scientists. This advantage is also outlined in several white papers. Moreover, Priebe and Markus
(2015) have provided a methodology which gathers and structures different data requirements
which are used for improving data-intensive projects and thus enabling Big Data Governance

34
Another emerging trend is Cloud Data Governance, which challenges have been identified and
grouped by a business, legal and technical dimension. Moreover, a well implemented and well-
developed Data Governance is a particular precondition for realizing open data

Data Governance is not a completely new concept. In fact, the approach has changed to
perceiving data not only as valuable within applications but to specific users extending this value
for the whole company, thus resulting in a cross-functional and cross-architectural view that
challenges business and IT leaders equally. In this sense, Data Governance needs an appropriate
long-term support and investment to be successful

Consequently, Data Governance concepts and principles also imply data management to be
compliant to strategically, tactical and operational policies of the organization. These findings
can be an essential part for the development and implementation of effective strategies and
approaches for Data Governance. Comparing to the DMBOK, some of its elements are included
in this model. However, it can be stated that it focuses almost entirely on the organizational
perspective. That is, it does not integrate further technical dimensions. Since Data Governance is
widely regarded as a combination of both the IT and the business aspects, this model should be
extended by technical concepts as well in order to emphasize the strong relation between these
two fields. In addition, an often-cited phrase that should be considered in this context is "one size
does not fit all", which means that it is not possible to create a unique Data Governance
framework that can be used by all organizations without further adaptions

Knowledge Management
Knowledge is the most paramount aspect of any organization aspiring success or already
successful and the way it is gotten and used actually help them maintain a higher competitive
edge. This can be seen from the way they improvise creation of knowledge, sharing of
knowledge, usage of knowledge and management of knowledge into their business processes.
Knowledge is a fluid mix of framed experiences, values, contextual information, and expert
insight that provides a framework for evaluating and incorporating new experiences and
information. It originates and is applied in the minds of professionals in the field. In
organizations, it often becomes embedded not only in documents or repositories but also in
organizational routines, processes, and norms (Davenport and Prusak, 1998). In addition, Gartner
Group defines Knowledge Management as a discipline that promotes an integrated approach to

35
identifying, managing and sharing all of an enterprise's information assets. It is the discipline
applied to manage intellectual capital."

Bailey and Clarke (2008) describe Knowledge Management as ``how managers can generate,
communicate and exploit knowledge (usable ideas) for personal and organizational benefit'' and
highlights not only the organizational importance of Knowledge Management, but also its
relevance for individual managerial action. ``Organization benefit'' means improving the
effectiveness of organization strategy, operational processes, and change management, thus
ensuring that the Knowledge Management focus is currentmnjh. ``Personal benefit'' means that
the individual manager is able to identify ``what's in it for me to adopt a Knowledge
Management perspective?'', thus capturing the personal motivation for adopting a KM frame of
reference, the importance of which has been largely omitted from discussions on the subject
(Hackett, 1999; McAdam and McCreedy, 1999). Finally, the words ``how managers can'' are
important here too. For managers to do anything with ideas that are personally relevant and
organizationally important, they need to be able to see Knowledge Management as within the
range of actions available to them within their role, level, power etc.

Some inherent critical success factors are built into this definition because without them,
knowledge will not be able to be gotten, refined or kept for further use. Knowledge management
is a set of strategies and approaches, which denotes a definite structure or a way to do things.
Another critical piece of this definition is that this approach enables the flow of information to
the right person at the right time; otherwise, an organization would be managing its knowledge
just for the sake of managing it and not to create value. That brings us to the most critical aspect
of Knowledge Management: creating more value for the organization. The most elaborate
knowledge-sharing procedures will not help if the knowledge shared within an organization does
not enable its recipient(s) to create value, be it through increased revenue or time or cost savings
(Hasanali, 2002)

The successful implementation of Knowledge Management initiative depends on many factors,

some within the organization’s control, others not. Typically, some factors have effects on
Knowledge Management and can be grouped into five primary categories as below:

 Leadership:

36
Organizational viability depends in part on effective leadership. Effective leaders engage in both
professional leadership behaviors (e.g. setting a mission, creating a process for achieving goals,
aligning processes and procedures) and personal leadership behaviors (e.g. building trust, caring
for people, acting morally). Interestingly, most of what we know about leadership comes from
the examination of how employees relate to their immediate supervisors. However, examining
individual perceptions of “leadership” at the organizational level is an interesting proposition
(Bailey and Clarke, 2008). At first glance, it may seem that professional leadership behaviors
such as aligning processes and procedures may be more easily conceptualized at the
organizational level than personal leadership behaviors such as acting morally. However, recent
events such as Enron and WorldCom suggest the important impact of personal leadership. In
these cases, negative personal leadership behaviors were present throughout the organization and
the consequences were dramatic (Hill and Knowlton, 2007).

Ideal leaders do not exist in practice. Thus, we can relate to leadership as a progressive
development only. Since we humans cannot be fully conscious of our emotions, a posteriori, we
cannot fully mobilize them in order to understand and attain our life goals and purpose. Because
our purpose remains opaque at best, it follows that leaders will act unethically even when they do
so unwillingly or unconsciously. The only way for leaders to improve their ethical position is to
interact with others in society to help them reveal their hidden agenda over time (Kotter, 1990).
The particular worldview, in turn, shapes these agendas, either Theta or Lambda that a person
embodies in his search for greater self-awareness and contextualization with his external
environment. Both the behavioral perspective as well as the economic model examines
leadership as a role whose purpose is to assist an organization to adapt. That is how an individual
practicing leadership can help an organization to affect adaptive change (Heifetz, 1998; Nanus,
1995)

– The theory of leadership

Adding to Kurt Lewin’s (1945) observation that “there is nothing as practical as a good theory”,
Whetten (2002) suggests that only a good theory is practical. Hence, we have two successive
goals:

 We should understand the components that comprise theory; and

37
  We should incorporate this knowledge into the theory of leadership.

Like any theory, leadership theory has to answer to three key questions – what, why and how
(Whetten, 2002). “What” refers to the constructs analyzed, or the target of theorizing; “how”
explains the methods we use to create interrelationships between constructs of the theory; and
“why” represents the conceptual assumptions behind these relationships. Thus, in leadership
theory the “what” represents the goal that the leader looks to attain, the “how” explains the way
the leader reaches the goal, and the “why” explains the reasons behind selecting this particular
method for attaining the goal. However, we contend that while the literature into leadership deals
with what leaders do or how they do it, it is silent about the reasons for why leaders are
motivated to pursue such activities.

Chemers (2002) describes leadership as the process of social influence in which one person can
enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task. Leadership plays a
key role in ensuring success in almost any initiative within an organization. Its impact on
Knowledge Management is even more pronounced because the more experienced a leader is, the
more he or she can make meaning out of Knowledge available. Nothing makes greater impact on
an organization than when leaders model the behavior they are trying to promote among
employees. The CEO at Buckman Laboratories, a chemicals company, orchestrates the
Knowledge Management initiative within the organization and personally reviews submissions
to its knowledge bank. When he notices that a particular employee has not had been active
within the system, he sends a message that reads: "Dear associate, you haven't been sharing
knowledge. How can we help you? All the best, Bob" (Hasanali, 2002)

Several other best-practice organizations have demonstrated this commitment to Knowledge

Management. At the World Bank, the president's support led to the creation of an infrastructure
that promoted and supported the growth of communities of practice (CoPs) not only throughout
the organization, but also around the globe. Today, the World Bank has sustained its Knowledge
Management initiative through its CoPs. Its knowledge managers constantly search for new
approaches to knowledge sharing.

38
Although leadership plays a critical role in the success of the Knowledge Management initiative,
the "culture" factor can be even more important to the success of Knowledge Management. This
moves us into the next section.

 Culture:
From the Corporate perspective, culture helps explain why some companies are more successful
than others. Kotter and Heskett (1992) investigated the relationship of culture to corporate
performance, they summarized their research by means of four conclusions as below

 Corporate culture can have a significant impact on a firm’s long-term economic

performance.
 Corporate culture will be an even more important factor in determining the success or
failure of firms.
 Cultures that inhibit strong long-term financial performance are common, and they
develop easily even when employees are reasonable and intelligent people
 Although tough to change, corporate cultures can be made more performance enhancing

The effects of culture on the performance of an organization depend, not on the strength of the
overall culture, but on the mix and weightings of the components of that culture. An example is
the component of conflict, which may be a healthy incentive for action and competition when
present in some forms and degrees, but can be damaging when it becomes the culture’s dominant
feature and its existence is not acknowledged. Research theory in the management of non-profits
emphasizes the need for consonance and deplores the existence of conflict; however, research
shows that some community organizations do not fit the model presented in the literature and
that conflict does exist in these organizations and can cripple their ability to function in goal-
setting, staffing, the conduct of meetings, problem solving and decision making, the
identification and utilization of individual skills, and writing submissions for government
funding(Heskett,1999).

The concept of organizational culture has been well documented in the literature, though there is
still inconsistency in definitions and therefore uncertainty in the meaning of the term. While
some authors see culture as basic assumptions held by organization members (Sathe, 1983;

39
Schein, 1984; Lewis, 1992), most authors prefer to view it as a combination of assumptions,
feelings, beliefs, values and behaviour.

Lewis (1996) believes that this preference could be either a result of the culture model’s basing
itself on the organizational development model, which takes this broad view of culture; or a
result of the important influence of the books of Peters and Waterman (1982) and Deal and
Kennedy (1982), who also propounded the “combination” theory. Whichever view of culture is
taken, culture itself is a contributing factor to what makes one organization different from
another. It is the essence of an organization – its character, its personality. It is therefore long-
term and very difficult to change. Some researchers (Uttal, 1983) argue it is almost impossible to
change. Also, according to the literature, culture can have a significant impact on the
effectiveness and competitive advantage of an organization (Bettinger, 1989; Brown, 1992; Fiol,
1991; Kilmann, 1989; Petrock, 1990; Sherwood, 1988; Whipp, Rosenfeld and Pettigrew, 1989).

Culture is the combination of shared history, expectations, unwritten rules, and social customs
that compel behaviors. It is the set of underlying beliefs that, while rarely exactly articulated, are
always there to influence the perception of actions and communications of all employees.
(Hasanali, 2002)

Cultural issues concerning Knowledge Management initiatives usually arise due to the following
factors:

 Lack of Time:

Life is time the meaning of life is to enrich the lives of others. The way you manage your time is
the way in which you manage your life. Infect, time cannot be managed however, you can
manage the activities in your life. (Dobbins and Pettman1998). Dobbins and Pettman(1998), also
identifies most common time waster which are as below.

They say that managers attribute their time wasting to the following causes:

 Telephone calls
 Unexpected visitors
 Poor delegation
 Ineffective, prolonged, unnecessary meeting

40
  No clarity of objectives, planning
 Firefighting, being reactive rather than proactive
 Trying to juggle too many balls at the same time
 Inability to make decisions, delayed decisions
 Failing to say “NO”
 Poor communications, unclear instructions
 Unavailable, inaccurate information
 Poor self-discipline
 Incompetent staff
 Social “business”

According to Drucker (1967), executives do not manage their time well. We assume that this
issue applies to all professions (e.g., Dahl, 1990). Currently there is a major shift of the
workforce from manual work to knowledge and service work.

According to Drucker, we have since Scientific Management been concerned with the most
effective use of time where it matters least – manual work. Here the difference between time-use
and time-waste is primarily efficiency and cost. “But we have not applied it to the work that
matters increasingly, and that particularly has to cope with time: the work of the knowledge
worker and especially of the executive. Here the difference between time-use and time-waste is
effectiveness and results” (Drucker, 1967, p. 35). Hence, with an increasing number of
knowledge workers, it becomes more and more vital to make time effective.

We forget that our preoccupation with time as measured by the hands of a clock is a relatively
modern phenomenon. In Western Europe most cities and market towns had public clocks only by
the seventeenth century, and even then, ones that had to be frequently reset using a sundial, such
was their inaccuracy. Timekeeping was imprecise, but this changed with the advent of the
industrial revolution which “required worker discipline if machine and man were to be
integrated” (Thrift, 1990). The industrial revolution enabled the mass manufacture of watches –
portable, personal timekeeping devices, which became at once both a status symbol to own and a
source of enslavement that served to entrap all future generations within a chronological
paradigm of time: time is duration that can be, indeed must be, timed.

41
Over the centuries precision in timekeeping has increased not only because watches and clocks
have become more reliable but also because the integration of modern society has demanded it.
Topik (1992) suggested, for example, that precision in timekeeping in modern China began only
when transport and travel became more rapid and the need to integrate such systems increased.
The study of the content of the advertising in one American magazine led Gross and Sheth(1989)
to infer that consumers became more concerned with clock time as society became more
industrialized and urbanized.

The goal is not to encourage the employees to work more, but to work more effectively. The
processes, technologies, and roles designed during a Knowledge Management initiative must
save employees' time, not burden them with more work. This can only be accomplished if the
employees' work patterns are accounted for during the initial design and planning phase of the
initiative.

 Unconnected Reward Systems:

There is a substantial body of theoretical literature that links organizational strategy, human
resource (HR) practices, and performance (Balkin and Gomez- Mejia, 1987; Hambrick and
Snow, 1989; Lawler, 1986a; Lawler, 1986b; Ulrich and Lake, 1990; Waldman, 1994). This
literature typically suggests that human resource practices should be selected which complement
and support an organizational strategy. More specifically, the reward system should be aligned to
motivate employee performance that is consistent with the firm's strategy, attract and retain
people with the knowledge, skills and abilities required to realize the firm's strategic goals, and
create a supportive culture and structure (Galbraith, 1973; Kilmann, 1989; Nadler and Tushman,
1988). Furthermore, the literature argues that alignment of the reward system with organizational
strategy helps to determine organizational effectiveness.

A review of the literature which links organizational strategy and human resource practices by
Becker and Gerhart (1996) suggests that the human resource system can be a unique source of
competitive advantage, especially when its components have a high degree of internal and
external fit. Another review by Gomez-Mejia and Balkin (1992) contends that the old model of
compensation (with pay structures based on job analyses, descriptions, specifications, and
classifications) is no longer effective in today's business environment. They conclude that

42
modern organizations must align their reward system practices with their organizational strategy
in order to achieve higher levels of performance at both the individual and organizational level.

At this point, the literature has remained mostly at the conceptual level in discussing the link
between organizational strategy, the reward system and firm performance. These propositions
have remained largely untested and there is a recognized need for empirical work in this area
(Lawler and Jenkins, 1994; Ledford, 1995; Waldman, 1994).

Reward and recognition for individual employees remains one of the controversial areas of
quality management. Notable authors such as Deming (1986) believed that fair ratings in such
systems were impossible due to supervisor biases, worker competition and organizational
politics. More recently, Scholtes (1995) has listed five reasons to explain why reward,
recognition and incentive systems do not work:

 no data to show long term benefits;

 they set up internal competition;
 reward systems undermine teamwork and co-operation;
 they often reward those who are lucky and pass by those who are unlucky; and
 They create cynics and losers.

Organizations have to maintain a balance between intrinsic and explicit rewards in order to
encourage employee behavior. The most effective use of explicit rewards has been to encourage
sharing at the onset of a Knowledge Management initiative. If the attendees don't find value in
either the meetings or the information on the system, providing incentives will not sustain their
participation. People share because they want to, they like to see their expertise being used, and
they like being respected by their peers.

 Lack of common perspectives - Sharing must be inspired by a common vision. The

people affected by the new process or technology must all buy in to this vision and
believe it will work. This usually happens when those in charge are from different work
background, so they have different beliefs and different attitudes to work.
 No formal communication - Internal communication has for many years been the
stepchild of public relations and communication management. Clutterbuck and James
(2001) quote a survey by Business Intelligence that two thirds of businesses in the UK

43
 formed internal communication departments only within the past few years. The internal
communication discipline has, however, begun to compensate for its Cinderella image. In
a Hill and Knowlton survey among more than 250 senior corporate communications
officers 90 per cent of the participants list building support among employees and other
key stakeholders as critical to their program (Hill and Knowlton, 1997). Employee
communication is rated second, after addressing company changes, as an issue facing
corporations in five years.

When designing and implementing Knowledge Management initiatives, the Knowledge

Management charter should ensure that employees and customers know about the changes
occurring in the organization

It has been hypothesized that a person needs to hear the same message at least three times before
it registers in the brain. Hence, communication should be pervasive and reiterative from time to
time. When an organization designs Knowledge Management initiatives around its culture, it will
be able to initiate a cultural change.

Most material dealing with effective organizational communication assumes that one individual
is the sole receiver of that communication. In actual practice, much organizational
communication involves communication aimed at groups. This communication often takes place
in meetings. Therefore, organizational communication directed toward groups and transmitted
within meetings needs study and attention (Spinks and Wells, 2006). Implication for
organizational communication is that communication must not be directed towards individuals
alone, but must be directed towards groups, formal and informal, which exist in the organization.
Herein lies a serious problem.

The power to influence the success or failure of organizational activities that is wielded by
informal groups is so great that those groups cannot be ignored, but must be recognized and dealt
with as real entities. However, in so doing, leaders must be careful not to usurp the legitimate
and rightful role of the formal organization and its formal groups. Striking a balance – a happy
medium between these two factors – is a hallmark of a good organizational leader (Spinks,
2007).

 Structure, Roles and Responsibilities:

44
Staniforth (1994) explains that some 72 per cent of manufacturing firms in a survey, report
significant changes in their organization structures in the last two years. Structure is seen by
many as a powerful tool in mobilizing resources in both an efficient and effective manner. The
desire for change is clearly present, but whether positive outcomes will result is another matter.
What is the role of structure? What factors affect structure? Which structural types work best?
These are some of the key questions many senior managers have to grapple with. Organization
structure is the formal presentation of systems of positions and relationships within the firm. It
should be an operational statement of the firm’s goals.

It specifies formal communication channels, who does what and who is responsible for
whom/what. Structure may be seen as a statement from senior management as to how they wish
the firm to work (Leavitt, 1978). In essence the structure of the firm should reflect the activities
of the firm. As trends towards team working, empowerment, total quality management, etc.
gather pace, structure needs to facilitate these initiatives. While many firms are now much better
at displaying mission statements, quality definitions and other corporate data, many people inside
the firm remain unaware of the organization chart and its true significance.

In any group there is differentiation between the group members in terms of the functions they
perform (Hare, 1994). These different functions constitute the roles of the group members
whether they be formal (such as chairperson or secretary) or informal (such as facilitator or
joker). Although a great deal has been written about social roles (Biddle, 1979; Mills, 1984),
little research of an empirical nature has been carried out into the different types of roles in small
groups.

Most research on roles has come either from sociologically-oriented psychologists (Heiss, 1981;
Stryker and Statham, 1985) who focus on theoretical accounts of roles or from management
psychologists who tend to rely on descriptive case studies (Adair, 1986; Handy, 1985).Even
social psychologists have tended to concentrate almost exclusively on just one role in the group –
the leader.

Although the leader is the single most influential member of a group, the collective influence of
the remaining members can easily exceed the leader’s influence (Hare and Kent, 1994). One
exception to this is work based on Belbin’s team-role model (Fisher et al., 1998, 2000, 2002).
Belbin (1981, 1993) argued that an individual member of a group usually adopts a specific way

45
of interacting with other members. Some behaviours are either favoured or resisted by
individuals, who choose particular roles according to their natural disposition. Individuals find it
easier to play a role that fits their personality characteristics and this result in effective
participation within a group.

According to Belbin, the useful people to have in teams are those who possess the strengths or
characteristics which serve a particular need without duplicating those already there. What is
needed for effective teams is not well-balanced individuals but individuals who balance well
with one another. In this way, weaknesses can be compensated and strengths used to full
advantage.

Governance of Knowledge Management initiatives differ within different organizations. A

steering committee should be put in place to oversee the general success and progress of the
knowledge Pool. The steering committee usually consists of executives at the top level. They
promote the concept and provide guidance, direction, and support. The central Knowledge
Management group is typically made up of three to four people who provide the initial support
for projects or initiatives, which are usually handed over to the business owners once they are
implemented.

The central group usually consists of people with advanced project management, facilitation, and
communication skills. The stewards, or owners, are responsible for knowledge sharing and
acquisition within the business units. Like the core Knowledge Management group, the stewards
are change agents for the organization. They model and teach employees the principles of
knowledge sharing using a common vocabulary. All of these participants work as a team to
prevent a silo mentality and incorporate resistant employees in the process (Hill and Knowlton,
2007).

Although the structure is put in place to establish ownership and accountability, if there is no
overall ownership of knowledge and learning within the organization and the leadership does not
"walk the talk," it will be difficult to sustain any sharing behavior.

 IT infrastructure
As the global business environment has become more dynamic and complex, competition among
companies has become increasingly intense amid ever tighter budget constraints. This tension

46
has forced organizations to make the management of all its resources a priority. The
improvement of productivity, cycle times, customer service and responsiveness has become ever
more critical. At the same time, business executives are expected to make quick but careful
decisions that will take advantage of emerging opportunities. Therefore, they are beginning to
realize the importance of information technology (IT) and understand its role in changing and
improving the way businesses operate.

Although IT is an important tool in attaining the desired growth and competitiveness of today’s
businesses, it may also constitute a major portion of an organization’s capital investment
(Alshawi et al., 2003; Kumar, 2004; Huang et al., 2006). As reported by Cuneo (2005), average
IT spending among the companies in InformationWeek 500 during 2001-2005 was
approximately US$ 300 million per year. Moreover, IT spending in the US economy has
increased by more than 200 per cent since 1970 (Mistry, 2006). IT investment and its payoffs
have always been important to executives but now there is another issue which is increasingly
concerned under ever-changing business environments. The question is, with a large investment,
how can IT infrastructure be managed to best achieve today’s business goals as well as future
demand? The simple answer is that IT infrastructure must be flexible enough to handle changes.
However, there are two questions that must be answered first: what is ‘‘IT infrastructure
flexibility’’ and what characteristics of IT infrastructure are considered ‘‘flexible’’?

Firstly, IT is constantly evolving and change happens very quickly. Improved IT products and
services are released every day. In most cases, it is difficult for organizations to implement new
IT systems without a large re-investment and without affecting regular business operations.
Secondly, IT infrastructure is a long-term asset, a long-term shareholder value and it represents
the long-term options of an organization (Weill and Broadbent, 1998). Since IT infrastructure
involves a large investment and affects the entire organization, it is difficult to change in a short
period of time. Therefore, it must be able to support change without having to start from scratch
every time a new development is introduced because that costs too much and takes too long to
implement (Robertson and Sribar, 2002; Schalken et al., 2005). Thirdly, although some research
has been conducted concerning IT infrastructure flexibility, the concept itself is still vaguely
understood and not fully developed.

47
The use of IT in any organization is to facilitate better work environment and conditions.
Without a solid IT infrastructure, an organization cannot enable its employees to share
information on a large scale. Yet the trap that most organizations fall into is not a lack of IT, but
rather too much focus on IT. A Knowledge Management initiative is not a software application;
having a platform to share information and to communicate is only part of a Knowledge
Management initiative. Following are some Knowledge Management success factors related to
IT.

 Approach – Has to do with the ideas or actions intended to deal with a problem or
situation. The people who are charged with implementing Knowledge Management must
take the time to understand their users' needs. Matching the Knowledge Management
system with the Knowledge Management objectives is essential.

 Content - With a similar focus on users' needs, establishing great content involves
having processes in place to acquire, manage, validate, and deliver relevant information,
when and where it is needed.

 Common platforms - Standard companywide architecture ensures the sustainability and

scalability of Knowledge Management efforts. By understanding the organization's
infrastructure at a high level, the steering committee can guide the Knowledge
Management team in picking the appropriate technology. This is mostly done with IT
people. It is best to have as part of the top Management and IT person with knowledge of
business. This easily comes if the individual comes from an IT background and went
further to study business or management. Sometimes organizations realize that they need
a complete overhaul of their IT infrastructure before they can expect their employees to
share knowledge.

Many organizations have eliminated or are in the process of phasing out customized
legacy systems and replacing them with market-standard operating systems. This enables
organizations to build on the existing architecture by using off-the-shelf software that was
written to support these platforms, thus avoiding costly customized packages.

48
  Simple technology – The effectiveness of GOMS comes with usability of IT systems,
GOMS an acronym for Goals, Operators, Methods, And Selection Rules is a kind of
specialized human information process or model for human computer interaction
observation. GOMS reduces a user's interaction with a computer to its elementary actions
(these actions can be physical, cognitive or perceptual) (Stuart et.al 1983). If it takes
more than three clicks to find knowledge on your system, users will get frustrated. That
also has to be tempered with the amount of information being delivered and the
complexity of information demanded by the user. Another common mistake made in
information delivery is the emphasis on explicit knowledge. Although technology is
primarily used to deliver explicit knowledge, placing too much emphasis on it causes the
user to lose the context in which the information was shared and leads to
misunderstanding on how to interpret the knowledge.

 Adequate training - Knowledge Management is enabled by adequate technology and

people who know how to use it. Best-practice examples reveal that the central
Knowledge Management group should spend most of its time (after deployment)
teaching, guiding, and coaching users how to use the system to interact, communicate,
and share information and knowledge with one another.

 Measurements
Lord Kelvin, way back as 1906 explains measurement to be any process by which a value is
assigned to the level or state of some quality of an object of study. Most people fear
measurement because they see it as synonymous with ROI, and they are not sure how to link
Knowledge Management efforts to ROI (Compton, 1992). Although the ultimate goal of
measuring the effectiveness of a Knowledge Management initiative is to determine some type of
ROI, there are many intervening variables that also affect the outcomes.

In order for companies to ensure achievement of their goals and objectives, performance
measures are used to evaluate, control and improve production processes. Performance measures
are also used to compare the performance of different organizations, plants, departments, teams
and individuals, and to assess employees. Heim and Compton (1992) quoted the following words

49
of Lord Kelvin (1824-1907):”When you can measure what you are speaking about and express it
in numbers, you know something about it … (otherwise) your knowledge is a meager and
unsatisfactory kind; it may be the beginning of knowledge, but you have scarcely in thought
advanced to the stage of science.” In fact, the importance of performance measures was clearly
emphasized by the Foundation of Manufacturing Committee of the National Academy of
Engineering where one of the ten foundations of world-class practices states: “World-class
manufacturers recognize the importance of metrics in helping to define the goals and
performance expectations for the organization. They adopt or develop appropriate metrics to
interpret and describe quantitatively the criteria used to measure the effectiveness of the
manufacturing system and its many interrelated components (Edosomwan, 1990).

Companies will lose market share to overseas competitors who are able to provide higher-quality
products with lower costs and more variety. To regain a competitive edge companies will not
only shift their strategic priorities from low-cost production to quality, flexibility, short lead time
and dependable delivery, but also implemented new technologies and philosophies of production
management (i.e. computer integrated manufacturing (CIM), flexible manufacturing systems
(FMS), just in time (JIT), optimized production technology (OPT) and total quality management
(TQM)). The implementation of these changes revealed that traditional performance measures
have many limitations and the development of new performance measurement systems is
required for success (Ghalayini and Noble, 1996).

Because many variables may affect an outcome, it is important to correlate Knowledge

Management activities with business outcomes, while not claiming a pure cause-and-effect
relationship. Increased sales may be a result not only of the sales representatives having more
information, but also of the market turning, a competitor closing down, or prices dropping 10
percent. Due to the inability to completely isolate knowledge-sharing results, tracking the
correlations over time is important (Hasanali, 2002).

Bara et al. (2009) have highlighted various aspects of the BI systems (BIS) development such as:
architecture, lifecycle, modeling techniques and evaluation criteria for the system performance in
the research paper. The authors have highlighted that BIS reports are used for strategic decision
and ERP reports are used for operational decision. The authors have highlighted that BI systems
has the capability to gather, integrate internal & external data, analyse and provide presentable

50
information (key performance indicators) to the executive management to support strategic
planning, forecasting and tracking of business performance. The authors have highlighted that BI
systems enable managers to view data holistically and provides new insights affecting business
process and improves the information quality for strategic decisions.

Mitchell (2009) has highlighted in the article that the economic situation has forced companies to
focus on how existing BI tool can further help in their environment instead of buying the new BI
tool. The author has provided various strategies to get more out of existing BI tool. The strategies
focused around tool, training & business team. The author highlighted that companies should
minimize the number of BI tool and should eliminate the redundant tools and analytics and
should move toward 34 centralized business intelligence rather than department-based business
intelligence. The author also highlighted that the existing data should be presented to users in
more insightful manner, the users should be trained to understand both the data and the BI tool
and more & more sources of data should be integrated to derive additional value from the BI
tool. The author also highlighted that business should take driver seat in determining what
metrics to be analysed and should build new information models for new markets as the same
strategy cannot be applied to all the markets.

Serbanescu (2009) has highlighted the importance of BI tool in the competitive market of travel
agencies in Romanian business environment. The author has highlighted that increased
productivity, efficiency, quick response and the services offered are important elements in
attracting the customer in the market. The author has discussed OLAP, Data mining, reporting
and query technology of BI tool that can be used to determine tourist related queries such as past
trend of destinations & boarding houses and the upcoming trends of tourist destination &
boarding houses and can help in serving the customer in better manner. The author has
highlighted the BI tool can easily integrate data from various sources of travel agencies such as
front-office, booking system and internet application and helps in generating analytics on tourist
destinations, clients and service suppliers which helps in reducing time in decision-making,
reducing role of IT department in generating reports, reduces time in collecting periodic data and
analysis. The author also highlighted that BI solutions can be implemented on National
Association of Rural, Ecological and Cultural Tourism system of Romania to evaluate touristic
potential of the rural area and to make the best decisions for its development.

51
In the article Bucher et al. (2009) have discussed the concept and importance of process-centric
business intelligence, its benefits in supporting operational decision making by citing the
example of financial services company engaged in providing mortgage services through the
integrated supply of analytic information in the mortgage approval process. The authors have
highlighted various benefits of process centric business intelligence such as acceleration of
business process execution, improvement in process performance and increase in customer
profitability through accurate decision. The authors have provided service-oriented architecture
for implementation of process centric BI tool which comprises of front-end BI services 35 for
users for query, reporting and analytics services and backend bi services for connection,
transformation and integration etc. The authors have provided implementation roadmap starting
with service composition and business process management add-ons deployment in the existing
ERP landscape followed by BI tool integration into the business process for enabling of
analytical information-based decision-making.

Gessner and Scott (2009) highlighted the use of BI tool to improve sales and optimize cost of the
inside-sales team (team who do no travel for sales). The authors have highlighted that there is
increased focus on building inside-sales team in order to reduce high costs of transportation and
unknown travel challenges of an outside sales team. The authors have highlighted that BI tool
can be used to identify prospects/buyers based on frequency and order quantity pattern and the
inside-sales team to make a call/contact with prospects/buyer and helps in closing the sales .On
other hand there is need to optimize the cost of inside-sales team and this can be evaluated based
on comparing the sale conversion ratio for each employee and sharing best practices across the
team and measuring number of customers moving into position of making calls themselves for
buying from the position of being getting called.

Smietana (2010) has highlighted the importance of pervasive BI tool in helping manufacturing
and service providers to manage their supply chain operations efficiently and in profitable
manner. The author discussed how pervasive BI tool is helping in plan, source, make, deliver and
return stages of SCOR (Supply chain operations reference) framework of supply chain process
by citing example of wine & spirit distributor and healthcare provider. The author highlighted
that supply chain managers have to look for reduction in cost and have to protect the margin and
pervasive BI tool helps in decreasing inventory, improving customer satisfaction rating and cost

52
reduction in supply chain process. During planning stage, the BI tool can help in demand
forecasting based on the historical data, in sourcing stage the BI tool help in evaluating vendor
performance and helps in reducing inventory cost. In make stage, BI tool helps manufacturer to
re-deploy excess capacity and underutilized assets, reduce waste and decrease operating costs. In
delivery stage, geographical based BI tool helps in identifying transportation bottlenecks and
alternate delivery routes for efficient delivery and in return stage, BI tool can help in root cause
analysis of return goods and customer feedback analysis.

Ortiz Jr. (2010) has highlighted in his article that next generation pervasive BI (PBI) tool will
provide real-time and predictive analytics to the organizations. The author has provided
architecture of TIBCO Spot fire Enterprise Analytics PBI platform in the article. The author has
highlighted PBI system faces various challenges such as increases in data volumes, delayed
arrival of source data, delayed adoption by users in utilizing PBI, delay in finalizing key
performance indicators for real time tracking for operational decisions. The author recommended
that in order to fully utilize the PBI tool the organizations must change operational procedures
and culture. The author has highlighted that cost of PBI implementations has reduced over the
years due to lowering in cost for processing and storage of data and PBI implementation will
grow as increasing number of staff will perform their jobs based on operational information. The
author has highlighted that adoption of the PBI technology will further increase with web-based
cloud technologies which will enable the provision of PBI as a service in future.

Hribar (2010) has described and analysed six different maturity models for the assessment of the
maturity of BI tool in his research paper. The key highlights of each model are (i)The business
information maturity model is based on increasing importance of BI tool ,a well-documented
model and freely available for analysis,(ii) TDWI’s business intelligence maturity model is based
on the technical criteria (data ,architecture etc.) , well-documented and provides a web based tool
is available for self-assessment, (iii) Gartner’s maturity model for business intelligence and
performance management is used for people, processes, metrics & technology assessment, and
limited documentation is available freely for analysis on the model and any additional
documentation is available by making payment to Gartner, (iv) The business intelligence
maturity hierarchy model focused on four stages(data, information, knowledge and wisdom) in
knowledge management and limited documentation is available for analysis, (v) The

53
infrastructure optimization maturity model helps in assessment of company infrastructure and
enables transition from reactive to proactive infrastructure service delivery organization and the
model is incomplete in the area of BI tool, (vi) AMR Research's business
intelligence/performance management maturity model focused on people, processes &
technology and the documentation of the model is not available in public domain for analysis.

The author highlighted that by using maturity models with in short time the company can
discover the gaps in the BI tool and can take necessary actions. The author highlighted that
maturity model for BI tool helps organizations in building a roadmap for future based on the
assessment report and the organization objectives.

Popovic et al. (2010) have provided conceptual framework & model to measure business value
of BI system in their research paper. The model helps in providing business case for investments
into BI tool and model was designed on extensive review of literature, in-depth interviews and
case study. The authors highlighted that BI system leads to information quality (IQ) which in
turns leads to use of information in business process for decision making and which enhances
business performance. As the BI system maturity improves the value from information quality
also increase. The authors highlighted that assessing BI helps in two ways (i) proves that it’s
worth investing in the technology, (ii) helps in managing the BI process and ensure that user
needs are satisfied. The author highlighted that true business value of BI system is improved
business processes & organizational growth as a result of improved IQ.

In his article, Serbanescu (2010) has provided the concept, architecture and benefits of the BI
tool in today's competitive environment. The author has highlighted that objective of BI tool is to
facilitate the rapid availability of new knowledge about the business for better decisions .The
author has highlighted that a typical BI tool architecture contains extracting data from source and
transforming & loading the data into data warehouse in a multi-dimensional cube for storing the
summarized information as per the business need and process the same into meaningful insights
using front-end reporting tools such OLAP, static and live reporting, balanced scorecards,
budgeting and forecasting, data mining, exceptions and notifications etc. The author highlighted
that businesses need BI tool to take advantage of opportunities and avoid risk in real-time
situation and by combining BI tool with operational data enables companies to increase sales,
improve profits by optimizing cost activities and increase customer loyalty.

54
Brahma and Sarma (2010) have highlighted the new concept of cloud based BI tool for decision-
making in their article. The authors have highlighted various challenges such as security,
scalability, technology integration & performance in implementing cloud-based BI. The authors
have provided various scenarios where cloud-based business intelligence can be implemented in
companies having a) applications with well-defined points of integration, and healthy internal
enterprise architecture, b) application not requiring lot of data & can work with lower level of
security, c) cloud applications (Salesforce.com) where data already resides in the cloud, d)
application requiring one-time import of data from the sources for analysis.

The authors highlighted that cloud BI tool will not work in scenarios such as downstream data
integration, real time integration with EAI, real time analytics (churn management, supply chain
costs analytics), business activity monitoring and fraud detection, HR analytics, applications
involving intensive calculations, huge aggregations & massive storage and applications with
single sign-on. The authors highlighted that average cost for implementing a cloud BI
environment for a given scenario may be more than that of the same being implemented using
conventional BI technology stack over a longer period of duration and organization should take
the decision carefully.

55
 CHAPTER 5

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research methodology is a way to systematically solve the research problems. It guides the
researcher to do the research scientifically. It contains of different steps that are generally
adopted by a researcher to study his research problem along with the logic behind them. Data
become information only when a proper methodology is adopted. The research methodology
includes the logic behind the methods we use in the content of our research study.

Research Design:

A research design is the arrangement of condition for collection and analysis of data in a manner
which may result in an economy in procedure. It stands for advance planning for collection of
the relevant data and the techniques to be used in analysis, keeping in view the objective of the
research availability of time.

There are three types of research designs. They are,

 Exploratory research design.

 Conclusive research design.
1. Descriptive research design.
2. Causal research design.
 Performance monitoring research.

The Research design used in this study was descriptive research design. It includes surveys and
fact-finding enquiries of different kinds. The main characteristic of this method is that the
researcher has no control over the variables; he can report only what has happened or what is
happening.

Explanation of the Method

A Research Survey will be performed among 100 employees of company to understand the Data
Governance with reference of Dataeaze Systems. For the research we will go for the descriptive
research and exploratory research which is mainly based on primary data. Hence it will be

56
necessary to conduct research on the process. The technique of Random Sampling will be used
in the analysis of the data. The sample covered the employees from all the cadres, encompassing
the senior most officers to the workers.

Sampling Techniques:

The simple random sampling technique was employed in the selection of the sample.

Sample Size:

100 Employees

Tools for Data Collection

Study Conducted

The primary data was gathered through personal interaction. The information was gathered from
the structured questionnaire.

Sources of Data

 Primary data
 Secondary information

Primary Data

The information gathered out of the blue through perception and meeting strategy. The data is
gathered by watching the working of different divisions and furthermore by interviewing the
directors of the considerable number of offices. It is additionally gotten by the assistance of staff
individuals.

Secondary Data:

Secondary data has been collected from the Company Website, Internet etc.

Statistical Tools:

57
The data are analyzed through statistical methods. Simple Percentage Analysis is used for
analyzing are used for analyzing the data collected.

Simple Percentage Analysis:

Percentage analysis is the method to represent raw streams of data as a percentage (a part
in100‐ percent) for better understanding of collected data.

Graphs:

Graphical representations are used to show the results in simple form. The graphs are prepared
on the basis of data that is received from the percentage analysis

Limitations of the Study

 The company may not disclose and provide data for their confidentiality purposes.
 The understanding and knowledge may vary from person to person. The replied gives by
the respondents are taken for granted, though they are not uniform.
 Since names are mentioned in most of questionnaires, most of the employees answered
favorable to the company. This might have led to wring finding in the study.
 The interpretation being based on percentage method is not definite.
 The report is subjects to changes with fast changing scenario.

58
 CHAPTER 6

DATA COLLECTION, ANALYSIS & INTERPRETATION

1. Gender

Table no. 1

Gender No. of Respondents Percentage

Male 60 60%
Female 40 40%
Total 100 100%

Chart no. 1

Gender

40% Male
Female

60%

Interpretation:

Table 1 reveals that 60% of the respondents are male and 40% of the respondents are females.

59
 2. Age

Table no. 2

Age Group No. of Respondents Percentage

18-25 18 18%
25-35 42 42%
35-45 20 20%
45 years and above 20 20%

Chart no. 2

Age Group
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
18-25 26-35 36-45 46 years and above

Age Group

Interpretation:

Table 2 reveals that 18% of the respondents are of the age group of 18-25 years, 42% of the
respondents are of the age group of 26-35 years, 20% of the respondents are of the age group of
36-45 years and 20% of the respondents are of the age group of 46 years and above.

60
 3. Educational qualification

Table no. 3

Educational qualification No. of Respondents Percentage

Up to SSC 15 15%
HSC 45 45%
Graduate 28 28%
Post graduate 12 12%

Chart no. 3

Education qualification
50

45
40

35

30
25

20

15
10

0
Upto SSC HSC Graduate Post graduate

Education qualification

Interpretation:

Table 3 reveals that 15% of the respondents have an education qualification of up to SSC, 45%
of the respondents are HSC qualified, 28% of the respondents are graduates and 12% of the
respondents are post graduates.

61
 4. Since how long have you been working in Dataeaze Systems?

Table no. 4

DATAEAZE No. of Respondents Percentage

SYSTEMS
Less than 1 year 20 20%
1-3 years 40 40%
3-5 years 22 22%
More than 5 years 18 18%

Chart no. 4

TCS
45

40

35

30

25

20

15

10

0
Less than 1 year 1-3 years 3-5 years more than 5 years

TCS

Interpretation:

From the above table it is clear than 40% of the employees have an experience of 1-3 years
working in Dataeaze Systems, 22% of the respondents have an experience of 3-5 years, 20% of
the respondents have an experience of less than 1 year and 18% of the respondents have an
experience of more than 5 years working in Dataeaze Systems.

62
 5. Which is your management level in the company?

Table no. 5

Management level No. of Respondents Percentage

Top 18 18%
Middle 57 57%
Lower 25 25%
Total 100 100%

Chart no. 5

Management level

18%
25%

Top
Middle
Lower

57%

Interpretation:

From the above table it can be seen that 57% of the respondents are form middle management
level, 25% of the respondents are from lower management level and 18% of the respondents are
form Top management level.

63
 6. Does your organization have a data governance program in place?

Table no. 6

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Yes 62 62%
No 11 11%
Can’t say 27 27%
Total 100 100%

Chart no. 6

Opinion

27%
Yes
No
Can't say

62%
11%

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 62% of the respondents say yes, the organization has a data
governance program in place.

64
 7. What is the biggest obstacle to establishing a formal DG strategy?

Table no. 7

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Lack of resources (staff, IT, etc.) 39 39%
Too hard to prove the business case 20 20%
Not seen as important by senior management 18 18%
All Other 23 23%

Chart no. 7

Opinion

39

23
20
18

Lack of resources Too hard to prove the Not seen as All others
(staff, IT, etc.) business case important by senior
management

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table revels that according to 39% of the respondent’s lack of resources is the biggest
obstacle to establishing a formal DG strategy, according to 20% respondents it’s too hard to
prove the business case, according to 18% of the respondents not seen as important by senior
management and 23% of the respondents say all other situations are the biggest obstacle to
establishing a formal DG strategy.

65
 8. What is the most important benefit of Data Governance?

Table no. 8

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Improved Decision-Making 29 29%
Improved Operational Efficiency 19 19%
Improved Data Understanding and Lineage 16 16%
Improved Data Quality 18 18%
Complying with Industry Regulations 11 8%
Driving Revenue 7 4%

Chart no. 8

Opinion

29

19 18
16

11
7

Improved Improved improved improved complying driving

Decision operational data data quality with industry revenue
making efficiency understandin regulations
g and lineage

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 29% of the respondents say improved decision making, 19% of the
respondents say improved operational efficiency, 16% of the respondents say Improved Data
Understanding and Lineage and 18% of the respondents say Improved Data Quality are the most
important benefits of the data governance.

66
 9. What was / is the main driver for implementing a Data Governance program in
your organization?
Table no. 9

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Regulation and compliance 44 44%
Improve business intelligence and analytics 33 33%
Decrease customer risk 18 18%
Other 5 5%

Chart no. 9

Opinion

44

33

18

5
Regulation and improve business decrease customer other
compliance intelligence and risk
analytics

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 44% of the respondents believe regulation and compliance was the
main drivers for implementing a Data Governance program in the organization, 33% of the
respondents believe it was improving business intelligence and analytics, 18% of the respondents
believe decrease customer risk and 5% of the respondents there were other reasons.

67
 10. How often your organization externally is audited in relation to its Data Governance
program?
Table no. 10

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Never 35 35%
Less than once every 2 years 11 11%
Every 1-2 years 21 21%
Every 6-12 months 24 24%
At least every 6 months 8 8%

Chart no. 10

Opinion

35

24
21

11
8

never less than once every 1-2 years every 6-12 at least every 6
every 2 years months months

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 35% of the respondents believe their organization has never been
externally audited in relation to its Data Governance program, 11% of the respondents say less
than once every 2 years, 21% of the respondents say every 1-2 years and 24% of the respondents
say every 6-12 months the organization is externally audited in relation to its Data Governance
program.

68
 11. Would you consider your organization to be GDPR ready?

Table no. 11

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Yes 17 17%
No 43 43%
Not applicable 40 40%

Chart no. 11

Opinion

43
40

17

Yes No Not applicable

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 43% of the respondents believe that Dataeaze Systems is not yet
GDPR ready, 40% of the respondents believe it not applicable and only 17% of the respondents
think that Dataeaze Systems is GDPR ready.

69
 12. How successful has the Data Governance program been for your organizations?

Table no. 12

Opinion No. of Respondents Percentage

Very Successful 18 18%
Successful 33 33%
Somewhat Successful 40 40%
Unsuccessful 5 5%
Very Unsuccessful 4 4%

Chart no. 12

Opinion

40

33

18

5 4
Very successful successful somewhat unsuccessful very
successful unsuccessful

Opinion

Interpretation:

The above table reveals that 18% of the respondents think Dataeaze Systems has been very
successful, 33% of the respondent believe successful, 40% of the respondents believe somewhat
successful, 5% of the respondents say unsuccessful and 4% say Data Governance program been
very unsuccessful for the organization.

70
 CHAPTER 7

FINDINGS & OBSERVATIONS

 60% of the respondents are male and 40% of the respondents are females.
 18% of the respondents are of the age group of 18-25 years, 42% of the respondents are
of the age group of 26-35 years, 20% of the respondents are of the age group of 36-45
years and 20% of the respondents are of the age group of 46 years and above.
 15% of the respondents have an education qualification of up to SSC, 45% of the
respondents are HSC qualified, 28% of the respondents are graduates and 12% of the
respondents are post graduates.
 40% of the employees have an experience of 1-3 years working in Dataeaze Systems,
22% of the respondents have an experience of 3-5 years, 20% of the respondents have an
experience of less than 1 year and 18% of the respondents have an experience of more
than 5 years working in Dataeaze Systems.
 57% of the respondents are form middle management level, 25% of the respondents are
from lower management level and 18% of the respondents are form Top management
level.
 62% of the respondents say yes, the organization has a data governance program in place.
 39% of the respondent’s lack of resources is the biggest obstacle to establishing a formal
DG strategy, according to 20% respondents it’s too hard to prove the business case,
according to 18% of the respondents not seen as important by senior management and
23% of the respondents say all other situations are the biggest obstacle to establishing a
formal DG strategy.
 29% of the respondents say improved decision making, 19% of the respondents say
improved operational efficiency, 16% of the respondents say Improved Data
Understanding and Lineage and 18% of the respondents say Improved Data Quality are
the most important benefits of the data governance.
 44% of the respondents believe regulation and compliance was the main driver for
implementing a Data Governance program in the organization, 33% of the respondents
believes it was improving business intelligence and analytics, 18% of the respondents
believe decrease customer risk and 5% of the respondents there were other reasons.

71
 35% of the respondents believe their organization has never been externally audited in
relation to its Data Governance program, 11% of the respondents say less than once every
2 years, 21% of the respondents say every 1-2 years and 24% of the respondents say
every 6-12 months the organization is externally audited in relation to its Data
Governance program.
 43% of the respondents believe that Dataeaze Systems is not yet GDPR ready, 40% of the
respondents believe it not applicable and only 17% of the respondents think that Dataeaze
Systems is GDPR ready.
 18% of the respondents think Dataeaze Systems has been very successful, 33% of the
respondent believe successful, 40% of the respondents believe somewhat successful, 5%
of the respondents say unsuccessful and 4% say Data Governance program been very
unsuccessful for the organization.

72
 CHAPTER 8

SUGGESTION
1. Communicate Effectively

Effective communication is the backbone of all effective data governance implementations, so it

lands number one on our list. You need to make sure that your program is
effectively communicated to your organization. You empower your employees when you
communicate not just the “what” of your implementation, but also the “why.” Are you rolling
out this new data governance initiative because of regulatory requirements? Is it being rolled out
to help share data across organizational silos and boost departmental results? Will your
implementation open up a new line of business or engage new business partners? By
empowering your employees with the “why” of your implementation, they make better
decisions. And those decisions mean a better implementation.

It’s critical to ensure that, in addition to effectively communicating downward and outward, your
employees can communicate upward. Often, the employees responsible for day-to-day tasks
around data governance are line-level employees. These employees are often inexperienced in
communicating important issues up the management chain, and that inexperience means
important information is lost or missed. Your team will boost your implementation’s chances of
success by training line-level employees on effective language to use around data governance.
You might consider options like email templates and public mailing lists to help individual
employees surface data governance issues easily.

When you consider a data governance implementation from the ground up, you eliminate many
potential roadblocks before they even materialize.

2. Engage Stakeholders Early

An effective data governance implementation has a wide variety of effective roles. Failing to
identify and engage key stakeholders early in the implementation process will torpedo your
implementation. It’s critical to understand here that engagement doesn’t just mean keeping those
stakeholders informed. Stakeholders occupy the roles they do because they bring critical
business knowledge to the table.

73
Make sure to consult with stakeholders on important decisions in their area of responsibility, and
inform them about decisions outside their area of responsibility. By communicating effectively
with your stakeholders, you’ll identify pitfalls within your implementation that you might not
have seen coming otherwise.

3. Establish Your Sources of Truth Early

There’s often business confusion about which data is reliable, and that’s another common driver
for data governance. It’s impossible to make effective decisions when income data in your sales
system doesn’t match the income amounts in your accounting system. Businesses struggle when
they have no single source of truth for their data. That leads to guessing about what’s correct if
things don’t add up.

Data governance demands that you make decisions about the source of truth for your data. This
doesn’t mean you need to have a single source of truth for all your data, but all your data should
have a singular source of truth. You need to decide if sales data or accounting data is the singular
source of truth for income amounts. Once you make those decisions, the process of getting data
from its singular source of truth to the people who need it becomes much easier.

4. Remember That Data Governance Isn’t a Developer’s Job

Many businesses fall into the common trap of making data governance the responsibility of their
app developers. The logic makes a certain kind of sense because your applications are often what
generate the data in the first place.

Application developers shouldn’t be excused from worrying about data governance, but you
can’t make them solely responsible. These folks are subject to a variety of competing demands.
They have tight deadlines, performance requirements, bugs to fix, and new features to
implement. A developer who’s under pressure will be more likely to cut corners on data
governance in their code.

In the same way, you’re asking for trouble leaving data governance in the hands of your project
managers. They’re subject to a similar set of competing pressures, and they’re used to weighing
trade-offs to get projects out the door. You don’t want to be surprised when the new version of
some software launches and you learn that data governance was too expensive to implement

74
properly. Instead, seek to make data governance everyone’s responsibility. Developers and
project managers should certainly have input over how data governance will tie into their work,
but they shouldn’t make the final decisions.

5. Identify a Data Governance Framework and Stick to It

Data governance frameworks simplify the way that you communicate about your
implementation. Choosing a framework early creates a common language around data
governance. This common language simplifies meetings and makes it easy to onboard new
stakeholders in your process. Many businesses will adopt a framework, then cut out parts of the
framework that they find difficult to follow. Resist this temptation, as you’ll likely find that those
difficult parts were included for a reason and by cutting them out, you’ve crippled your
implementation.

There are a variety of different frameworks with varying pros and cons. Most look something
like this one from the Data Governance Institute. I’d advise you to spend some time reading and
thinking about your business’s needs before picking a strategy. It will pay off down the road.
You might even consider organizational training to kick things off because the first steps are
often the hardest.

6. Start Small and Build on Success

Data governance is a big topic, and implementing it is a challenging undertaking. As with many
big projects, you’ll learn a lot from your first implementation. You’ll learn even more from your
second one.

Luckily, you can make this learning process work for your business by starting small with your
data governance implementation. Instead of trying to implement data governance across your
whole business, identify key departments and target your first implementations to these
departments. A successful implementation will earn you capital, both political and monetary, to
improve your next phase.

Take note of what went well and not so well, as it will smooth over problems as you expand your
implementation. You can also identify people who’ve been exemplary in data governance
practice and ask them to train employees in the next department.

75
7. Curtail Perverse Incentives

Perverse incentives in data governance come in a variety of forms. The worst, for your business,
are incentives to hide data governance issues.

An example of a common perverse incentive is tying manager bonuses to a few reported data
governance issues. This incentivizes managers to cover up issues that they or their employees
discover. Instead of bringing them to light and rectifying the problem, your business will
continue to creep along under the impression that everything is fine, until one day the problem
becomes too big to ignore. Instead, you should recognize and reward employees and managers
who uncover data governance issues, as well as the people who help fix the problems.

8. Plan to Train

A key fact of any data governance implementation is that things are changing. If you were
already doing everything correctly, you wouldn’t need a big project to fix them. These changes
mean disruptions, sometimes big ones, for your employees. Often, you may be asking them to do
things a certain way because of legal or auditing requirements, which means it’s critical that they
get it right every time.

You should expect that you’ll need to train every employee who interacts with your data about
how their job will be changing and how to handle data correctly in the future. Effective training
is often the longest phase of any data governance implementation, but it’s possible to engage
experts to help speed along that process.

9. Agree on Standards Early

Another way you can speed up your training plan is to agree on a data governance framework.
Whatever steps you take to decide on standards, you need to do so early. Your standards should
answer questions about where your data originates, where it resides, and who has access to it.
Making these decisions means key stakeholders know who’s responsible for which pieces of
data. And knowing who’s responsible for data means knowing who to talk to when you need
access.

This doesn’t mean that your standards should be inflexible. You’ll find as your implementation
progresses that there are data sources and owners your initial discovery process didn’t uncover.

76
Part of your standards conversation should be deciding how to decide. When will other parts of
the standard need to be modified? If you don’t agree upon on these things early, you’ll slow your
implementation’s planning and rollout process. Remember: key decisions require many rounds
of conversation to resolve.

10. Don’t Make Your Data Stewards Do Too Much

Data stewards are employees responsible for the safeguarding of your data, and it’s easy to
saddle them with too much responsibility. When a data steward is overloaded, they’re more
likely to make mistakes or cut corners. And if you’re undertaking your data governance
implementation for regulatory reasons, this can open you up to liability issues.

Designing a data governance implementation is a tall order, and you’ll find that no matter how
much you plan, there will be things you miss. These tips are designed to get you thinking about
areas you might be overlooking as you lay out your plan. Establishing a good plan early and
communicating it effectively will provide you the tools you need to course correct when things
get tough.

77
 CHAPTER 9

CONCLUSION
The improved data quality has a considerable effect on the efficiency of business processes and
the business performance, but also positively increases compliance with the regulator. The exact
determination of the effects, however, remains a specific and complex task, as many company-
specific factors that determine business performance and compliance are influenced by data
governance. Thereby, it turns out to be difficult to abstract data governance from other measures
in the Enterprise Data Management Framework. For now, the fact that the experiences with
Enterprise Data Management are consistently positive motivates us to continue delivering this
message, helping future clients in creating a sustainable data management organization.

Data governance is an umbrella term for an emerging discipline that encompasses a number of
different practices for data quality, data management, business process management, and risk
management. The goal is to ensure that data serves business purposes in a sustainable way.
MDM Institute defines data governance as “the formal orchestration of people, processes, and
technology to enable an organization to leverage data as an enterprise asset.” The Data
Governance Institute goes a step further, stating that “data governance is a system of decision
rights and accountabilities for information-related processes, executed according to agreed-upon
models, which describe who can take what actions with what information, and when, under what
circumstances, using what methods.” According to Wikipedia, “data governance encompasses
the people, processes, and information technology required to create a consistent and proper
handling of an organization’s data across the business enterprise. Goals may be defined at all
levels of the enterprise and doing so may aid in acceptance of processes by those who will use
them.”

Data governance is critical in today’s business environment. Internal and external demands to
manage risk make it imperative to have a single version of the truth, yet the proliferation of data,
applications, and technology makes it harder to achieve. Data governance gives you the power to
unite business objectives, technology initiatives, and information policy. It makes sure that all
stakeholders see one version of the truth, and ensures that version is actually true. Although the
task can seem daunting and expensive, it doesn’t have to be. Throughout this paper, we have

78
shown a practical, cost-effective approach that has been used by leading organizations for
immediate, measurable improvements.

1. Prioritize areas for business improvement

2. Maximize availability of information assets

3. Create roles, responsibilities, and rules

4. Improve and ensure information asset integrity

5. Establish an accountability infrastructure

6. Convert to a master data-based culture

7. Develop a feedback mechanism for process improvement

79
 REFERENCES

1. Bair, J 2004. Practical Data Quality: Sophistication Levels, viewed 25 Mar 2006
2. Benbasat, I, Goldstein, D & Mead, M 1987. The Case Research Strategies in Studies of
Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, September.
3. Brown, W, & Nasuti, F 2005. What ERP Systems can tell us about Sarbanes-Oxley.
Information Management & Computer Security, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 311-327.
4. Clemmons, S, & Simon, S 2001. Control and Coordination in Global ERP configuration.
Business Process Management Journal, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 205-215
5. Cohen, R 2006. BI Strategy: What's in a Name? Data Governance Roles, Responsibilities
and Results Factors. DM Review, viewed 12 Jan 2007
6. Cohen, R 2006. BI Strategy: What's in a Name? Data Governance Roles, Responsibilities
and Results Factors. DM Review, viewed 12 Jan 2007
7. Dember, M 2006. The 7 Stages of Highly Effective Data Governance: Advanced
Methodology for Implementation. CIBER Whitepaper, viewed 12 Jan 2007
8. Friedman, T 2006. Key Issues for Data Management and Integration, 2006, Gartner
Research. ID Number: G00138812, March.
9. Hawkins, K, Alhajjaj, S, & Kelley, S 2003. Using COBIT to Secure Information Assets. The
Journal of Government Financial Management, vol. 52, no. 2, pp 22-33
10. Informatica. Data Governance. Why it Matters to the Business. White Paper. Informatica,
viewed 13 Jun 2007.
11. Ives, B, Hamilton, S, & Davies, G 1982. Choosing Appropriate Information Systems
Research in Computer Based Management Information Systems. Management Science, vol.
26, no. 9, pp 910-932.
12. Lee, R 2000. The Role of Data Management in Transforming an Enterprise. Auerbach
Publications, viewed 27 May 2006.
13. Luftman, J 2004. Managing the Information Technology Resource. Pearson Prentice Hall,
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, USA.
14. Marinos, G 2004a. We’re Not Doing What? The Top 10 Corporate Oversights in Data
Governance. DM Review, September, viewed 6 Mar 2006 <www.dmreview.com>.
15. Marinos, G 2004b. Data Quality: The Hidden Assumption behind COSO, DM Review,
October, p. 12.

80
16. Matney, D. & Larson, D 2004. The Four Components of BI Governance. Business
Intelligence Journal, vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 29-36.
17. Newman, D. 2005. Business Drivers and Issues in Enterprise Information Management.
Gartner Research. ID Number: G00129712.
18. Newman, D 2006. Gartner Study on EIM Highlights Early Adopter Trends and Issues.
Gartner Research, February
19. Newman, D. & Logan, D. 2006. Governance Is an Essential Building Block for Enterprise
Information System. Gartner Research May.
20. Olson, J 2003. Data Quality: The Accuracy Dimension. Published by Morgan Kaufmann
Publishers, USA.
21. Russom, P 2006. Taking Data to the Enterprise through Data Governance. TWDI Report
Series, March, viewed 16 July 2006.
22. Thomas G 2006. Alpha Males and Data Disaster. Published by Brass Cannon Press, USA.

81
 QUESTIONNAIRE
1. Gender
a) Male
b) Female

2. Age group
a) 18-25 years
b) 26-35 years
c) 36-45 years
d) 45 years and above

3. Educational qualification
a) Up to SSC
b) HSC
c) Graduate
d) Post-graduate

4. Since how long have you been working in Dataeaze Systems?

a) Less than 1 year
b) 1-3 years
c) 3-5 years
d) More than 5 years

5. Which is your management level in the company?

a) Top
b) Middle
c) Lower

82
6. Does your organization have a data governance program in place?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Can’t say

7. What is the biggest obstacle to establishing a formal DG strategy?

a) Lack of resources (staff, IT, etc.)
b) Too hard to prove the business case
c) Not seen as important by senior management
d) All Other

8. What is the most important benefit of Data Governance?

a) Improved Decision-Making
b) Improved Operational Efficiency
c) Improved Data Understanding and Lineage
d) Improved Data Quality
e) Complying with Industry Regulations
f) Driving Revenue

9. What was / is the main driver for implementing a Data Governance program in your
organization?
a) Regulation and compliance
b) Improve business intelligence and analytics
c) Decrease customer risk
d) Other

83
10. How often your organization externally is audited in relation to its Data Governance
program?
a) Never
b) Less than once every 2 years
c) Every 1-2 years
d) Every 6-12 months
e) At least every 6 months

11. Would you consider your organization to be GDPR ready?

a) Yes
b) No
c) Not applicable

12. How successful has the Data Governance program been for your organizations?
a) Very Successful
b) Successful
c) Somewhat Successful
d) Unsuccessful
e) Very Unsuccessful

84