Finding Me

19th April 2012

Many people have many names and addresses. So have I.

A search for me within Danish reference sources in the iDQ tool gives the following result:

Green T is positive in the Danish Telephone Books. Red C is negative in the Danish Citizen hub. Green C is positive in the Danish Citizen Hub.

Even though I have left Denmark I’m still registered with some phone subscriptions there. And my phone company hasn’t fully achieved single customer view yet, as I’m registered there with two slightly different middle (sur)names.

Following me to the United Kingdom I’m registered here with more different names.

It’s not that I’m attempting some kind of fraud, but as my surname contains The Letter Ø, and that letter isn’t part of the English alphabet, my National Insurance Number (kind of similar to the Social Security Number in the US) is registered by the name “Henrik Liliendahl Sorensen”.

But as the United Kingdom hasn’t a single citizen view, I am separately registered at the National Health Service with the name “Henrik Sorensen”. This is due to a sloppy realtor, who omitted my middle (sur)name on a flat rental contract. That name was taken further by British Gas onto my electricity bill. That document is (surprisingly for me) my most important identity paper in the UK, and it was used as proof of address when registering for health service.

How about you, do you also have several identities?

Bookmark and Share

12 Comments | Big Reference Data, Identity Resolution, National ID, Search and navigation | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

MDM Summit Europe 2012 Preview

17th April 2012

I am looking forward to be at the Master Data Management Summit Europe 2012 next week in London. The conference runs in parallel with the Data Governance Conference Europe 2012.

Data Governance

As I am living within a short walking distance of the venue I won’t have so much time thinking as Jill Dyché had when she recently was on a conference within driving distance, as reported on her blog post After Gartner MDM in which Jill considers MDM and takes the road less traveled. In London Jill will be delivering a key note called: Data Governance, What Your CEO Needs to know.

On the Data Governance tracks there will be a panel discussion called Data Governance in a Regulatory Environment with some good folks: Nicola Askham, Dylan Jones, Ken O’Connor and Gwen Thomas.

Nicola is currently writing an excellent blog post series on the Six Characteristics Of A Successful Data Governance Practitioner. Dylan is the founder of DataQualityPro. Ken was the star on the OCDQblog radio show today discussing Solvency II and Data Quality.

Gwen, being the founder of The Data Governance Institute, is chairing the Data Governance Conference while Aaron Zornes, the founder of The MDM Institute, is chairing the MDM Summit.

Master Data, Social MDM and Reference Data Management

The MDM Institute lately had an “MDM Alert”  with Master Data Management & Data Governance Strategic Planning Assumptions for 2012-13 with the subtitle: Pervasive & Pandemic MDM is in Your Future.

Some of the predictions are about reference data and Social MDM.

Social master data management has been a favorite subject of mine the last couple of years, and I hope to catch up with fellow MDM practitioners and learning how far this has come outside my circles.

Reference Data is a term often used either instead of Master Data or as related to Master Data. Reference data is those data defined and initially maintained outside a single enterprise. Examples from the customer master data realm are a country list, a list of states in a given country or postal code tables for countries around the world.

The trend as I see it is that enterprises seek to benefit from having reference data in more depth than those often modest populated lists mentioned above. In the customer master data realm such big reference data may be core data about:

  • Addresses being every single valid address typically within a given country.
  • Business entities being every single business entity occupying an address in a given country.
  • Consumers (or Citizens) being every single person living on an address in a given country.

There is often no single source of truth for such data.

As I’m working with an international launch of a product called instant Data Quality (iDQ™) I look forward to explore how MDM analysts and practitioners are seeing this field developing.

Bookmark and Share

3 Comments | Big Reference Data, Data Governance, Master Data, Social MDM | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Bat-and-ball Data Quality

13th April 2012

Lately Jim Harris of the OCDQblog has written two excellent blog posts, or may I say home runs, discussing data quality with inspiration from baseball.

In the post Quality Starts and Data Quality Jim talks about that you may have a tough loss in business despite stellar data quality and have a cheap win in business despite of horrible data quality, but in the long run by starting off with good data quality, your organization have a better chance to succeed.

The follow up post called Pitching Perfect Data Quality Jim ponders that business success is achievable without perfect data quality, but data quality has a role to play.

Now, despite that baseball is a very popular sport in the United States, but largely unknown in the rest of world, I think we all understand the metaphors.

Also we have different but similar sports, with other rules, statistics and terms attached, over the world. The common name for these sports is bat-and-ball games.

In Britain, where I live now, cricket is huge and can be used to attract awareness of data issues. As late as yesterday the Ordnance Survey, a government body that have registries with addresses, coordinates and maps, made a blog post called Anyone for cricket? British blogger Peter Thomas also wrote among others a post on cricket and data quality called Wager.

Before coming to Britain I lived in Denmark, where we don’t know baseball, don’t know cricket but sometimes at family picnics, perhaps after a Carlsberg and a snaps or two, plays a similar game called rundbold, with kids and grandpa friendly rules and score board and usually using a tennis ball.

Data quality, not at least data quality in relation to party master data, which is the most prominent domain within the discipline, is also a same same but different game around the world as told in the post Partnerships for the Cloud.

Understanding the rules, statistics and terms of baseball, cricket, rundbold and all the other bat-and-ball games of the world is a daunting task, even though we all know how to hit a ball with a bat.

Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | Information Quality, Master Data, Sport | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Updating a Social Business Directory

5th April 2012

Business directories have been around for ages. In the old days it was paper based as in the yellow pages for a phone book. The yellow pages have since made it to be online searchable. We also know commercial business directories as the Dun & Bradstreet WorldBase as well as government operated national wide directories of companies and industry specific business directories.

Such business directories often takes a crucial role in master data quality work as sources for data enrichment in the quest for getting as close as possible to a single version of the truth when dealing with B2B customer master data, supplier master data and other business partner master data.

A classic core data model for Master Data in CRM systems, SCM solutions and Master Data hubs when doing B2B is that you have:

  • Accounts being the BUSINESS entities who are your customers, suppliers, prospects and all kind of other business partners
  • Contacts being the EMPLOYEEs working there and acting in the roles as decision makers, influencers, gate keepers, users and so on

Today we also have to think about social master data management, being exploiting reference data in social media as a supplementary source of external data.

As all social activity this exercise goes two ways:

  • Finding and monitoring your existing and wanted business partners in the social networks
  • Updating your own data

Most business entities in this world are actually one-man-bands. So are mine. Therefore I went to the LinkedIn company pages this morning and updated data about my company Liliendahl Limited: Unlimited Data Quality and Master Data Management consultancy for tool and service vendors.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | Big Reference Data, Business Directories, Social MDM | Tagged: , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Eating the MDM Elephant

27th March 2012

The idiom of eating the elephant one bite at time is often used when trying to vision a roadmap for Master Data Management (MDM).

It’s a bit of a contradiction to look at it that way, because the essence of MDM is an enterprise wide single source of truth eventually for all master data domains.

But it may be the only way.

Using a cliché MDM is (as any discipline) about people, processes and technology.

In an earlier post called Lean MDM a data quality and entity resolution technology focused approach to start consuming the elephant was described, here starting with building universal data models for party master data and rationalizing the data within a short frame of time.

I have often encountered that many organizations actually don’t want an entity revolution but are more comfortable with having entity evolution when it comes to entity resolution as examined the post Entity Revolution vs Entity Evolution.

The term “Evolutionary MDM” is used by the MDM vendor Semarchy as seen on this page here called What is Evolutionary MDM?

The idea is to have technology that supports an evolutionary way of implementing MDM. This is in my eyes very important, as people, processes and technology may be prioritized in the said order, but shouldn’t be handled in a serial matter that reveals the opportunities and restrictions related to technology at a very late stage in implementing MDM.

Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | Master Data | Tagged: , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Costs of a Single Citizen View

24th March 2012

Recently Andrew Dean made a blog post called National Identity Numbers. The post generated some comments in the Data Matching group on LinkedIn.

Andrew’s post is based on the ongoing project in India called Aadhaar, where every citizen is assigned a unique identification number to be used for multiple purposes when interacting with the government and financial institutions.

As Andrew mentions the United Kingdom cancelled such a project a few years ago. This cancellation was, in some part, due to fear of excessive costs. The question Andrew, and comments in the LinkedIn group, poses, is if the (feared) costs will justify the benefits of getting a “single citizen view”.

Indeed large governmental projects have a bad name these days all over the world as I know it.

Back in the late 60’s the United States was able to put a man on the moon.

It was at the same time that the Scandinavian countries implemented their “single citizen view”.

Besides digitalizing the national identification number Sweden also, in 1967, managed to change from driving on the left side of the road to driving on the right side. I’m not sure if Sweden could afford turning to the right side today not to say the United Kingdom doing the same.

Bookmark and Share

7 Comments | National ID | Tagged: | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Real World Identity

20th March 2012

How far do you have to go when checking your customer’s identity?

This morning I read an article on the Danish Computerworld telling about a ferry line now dropping a solution for checking if the passenger using an access card is in fact the paying customer by using a lightweight fingerprint stored on the card. The reason for dropping was by the way due to the cost of upgrading the solution compared to future business value and not any renewed privacy concerns.

I have been involved in some balancing of real world alignment versus fitness for use and privacy in public transport as well as described in the post Real World Alignment. Here it was the question about using a national identification number when registering customers in public transportation.

As citizens of the world we are today used to sometimes having our iris scanned when flying as our passport holds our unique identification that way. Some of the considerations around using biometrics in general public registration were discussed in the post Citizen ID and Biometrics.

In my eyes, or should we say iris, there is no doubt that we will meet an increasing demand of confirming and registering our identification around. Doing that in the fight against terrorism has been there for long. Regulatory compliance will add to that trend as told in the post Know Your Foreign Customer, mentioning the consequences of the FATCA regulation and other regulations.

When talking about identity resolution in the data quality realm we usually deal with strings of text as names, addresses, phone numbers and national identification numbers. Things that reflect the real world, but isn’t the real world.

We will however probably adapt more facial recognition as examined in the post The New Face of Data Matching. We do have access to pictures in the cloud, as you may find your B2C customers picture on FaceBook and your B2B customer contacts picture on LinkedIn or other similar services. It’s still not the real world itself, but a bit closer than a text string. And of course the picture could be false or outdated and thus more suitable for traction on a dating site.

Fingerprint is maybe a bit old fashioned, but as said, more and more biometric passports are issued and the technology for iris and retinal scanning is used around for access control even on mobile devices.

In the story starting this post the business value for reinvesting in a biometric solution wasn’t deemed positive. But looking from the print on my fingers down to my hand lines I foresee some more identity resolution going beyond name and address strings into things closer to the real world as facial recognition and biometrics.

Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | Data Matching, Identity Resolution, National ID | Tagged: , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Know Your Foreign Customer

13th March 2012

I’m not saying that Customer Master Data Management is easy. But if we compare the capabilities within most companies with handling domestic customer records they are often stellar compared to the capabilities of handling foreign customer records.

It’s not that the knowledge, services and tools doesn’t exist. If you for example are headquartered in the USA, you will typically use best practice and services available there for domestic records. If you are headquartered in France, you will use best practice and services available there for domestic records. Using the best practices and services for foreign (seen from where you are) records is more seldom and if done, it is often done outside enterprise wide data management.

This situation can’t, and will not, continue to exist. With globalization running at full speed and more and more enterprise wide data management programs being launched, we will need best practices and services embracing worldwide customer records.

Also new regulatory compliance will add to this trend. Being effective next year the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) will urge both US Companies and Foreign Financial Institutions to better know your foreign customers and other business partners.

In doing that, you have to know about addresses, business directories and consumer/citizen hubs for an often large range of countries as described in the post The Big ABC of Reference Data.

It may seem a daunting task for each enterprise to be able to embrace big reference data for all the countries where you have customers and other business partners.

My guess, well, actually plan, is, that there will be services, based in the cloud, helping with that as indicated in the post Partnerships for the Cloud.

Bookmark and Share

5 Comments | Big Reference Data, Data Quality Tools, Master Data | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Fit for repurposing

23rd February 2012

Reading a blog post by David Loshin called Data Governance and Quality: Data Reuse vs. Data Repurposing I was, perhaps a bit off topic, inspired to pose the question about if data are of high quality if they are:

  • Fit for the purpose of use
  • Fit for repurposing

The first definition has been around for many years and has been adapted by many data quality practitioners. I have however often encountered situations where the reuse of data for other purposes than the original purpose has raised data quality issues with else cleared data. One of my first pieces on my own blog discussed that challenge in a post called Fit for what purpose?

Not at least within master data management where data are maintained for multiple uses, this problem is very common.

Data in a master data hub may either:

  • Be entered directly into the hub where multiple uses is handled
  • Be loaded from other sources where data capture was done

In the latter case the data governance necessary to ensure fitness for multiple uses must stretch to the ingestion in these sources.

Now, if repurposing is seen as a future not yet discovered purpose of use, what can you then do to ensure that data today are fit for future repurposing?

The only answer is probably real world alignment as discussed here on a page called Data Quality 3.0. Make sure your data are reflecting the real world as close as we can when captured and make sure data can be maintained in order to keep that alignment. And make sure this is done and facilitated where data are entered.

Bookmark and Share

2 Comments | Data Governance, Master Data | Tagged: , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

Sharing Social Master Data

21st February 2012

If a company runs a Customer Relationship Management (CRM) system all employees are supposed to enter their interactions with customers and prospects including adding new accounts and contacts if it’s the first engagement.

With the rise of social networks first engagements are increasingly done in those networks. Furthermore new employees often bring old contacts from former employments with them thus utilizing an established relationship that probably is manifested in one or more already existing social network connections.

As explained in the post Social Master Data Management the term ”Social CRM” has been around for a while. We now see CRM solutions where the account and contact master data primarily is build on extracting those data from social networks.

I have just tried out such a solution called Nimble.

If you are more than a one-man-band company it’s interesting in what degree you are willing (or forced) to share your connections as master data entities for the CRM solution.

In Nimble you have the choice of differentiate for each network. I would probably freely choose a setup with Twitter and LinkedIn as shared with the team, but Facebook as private:

But that is just how I think based on my way of using social networks.

There is a fundamental data quality versus privacy issue around utilizing employee’s social network connections as master data for CRM and eventually enterprise wide Master Data Management (MDM).

All things equal data quality will be best if everyone contributes within reason. Not at least in sales, but also more or less in other functions, you are hired also because of your relations.

What do you think?

Bookmark and Share

Leave a Comment » | Social MDM | Tagged: , , , , , , | Permalink
Posted by Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 125 other followers