Governance a community activity

Since its inception, the term information governance has been both a boon and a bane to data management. The boon comes from the fact that it's a relatively new concept, which promotes interest in the topic. Conversely, its bane exists in the general misunderstanding of the term.

This is the view of Steve Adler, IBM Software Solutions Group, who spoke at the IBM Data Governance Forum last week.

Adler said the term data governance is misleading, as data by itself is inert. He argued that companies need to think of data governance as the governance of people interacting with data, as one cannot govern things that are inert, only the objects that interact with data.

“Governance is a community activity. There needs to be a coordination of communication to achieve collective goals through collaboration to drive change.” He added that change is difficult, as companies need to persuade employees to make changes when they already have their own perceptions of how processes should be handled.

He highlighted that companies have a specific culture, and often this change goes against that organisational structure.

“Governance can control the data inside the system, but it can also be used to control the data producers,” he stated, meaning there is scope to audit the people that are putting data into the system. “There should be a focus on the producers of data as well as the users of it.”

According to Adler, information governance is about coordinating the business and IT. He noted that every organisation has tribalism and dysfunction between departments, where ineffective communication causes a break down.

He added that technology can't change the behaviour of people either, as it is merely an enabler of processes and information. “Business and IT need to work together if information governance is going to work.”

“Governance is about awareness, what your organisation is doing and what's happening within your business,” said Adler. He noted there is a right way to communicate with people, and that open communication fosters the ability to reach a company's goal.

According to Adler, there are six steps to smart governance: Setting goals, defining metrics, making decisions, communicating policy, measuring outcomes, and auditing.

“The company needs to be a part of a formal structure, and identify what it is going to monitor, before metrics that are based on facts can be set.” He added there needs to be a clear definition of who the decision-makers are, as two kinds of authorities exist when it comes to decisions: direct authority and derived authority.

Direct authority exists as executive authority, which Adler said has problems where people resist policies with the rise of expertise in the organisation, while derived authority exists in the people that have built up skills and expertise in the organisation.

He added that communication is key in data governance, and it exists in many forms. “Software, applications, e-mail, and people are all forms of communication, and through their use you can communicate the policy decisions throughout the organisation.”

He concluded that companies need to audit continuously and be prepared for change. “Incremental progress is great and allows an organisation to constantly improve. There is no 100%, and your organisation will usually achieve less than you expected. Instead, work towards reaching that goal."