Today I noticed this tweet by Malcolm Chisholm:
The problem with the “fitness for use” or “fit for the purpose of use” definition of data quality has been a recurring subject on this blog starting with the post Fit for What Purpose? through to lately the post Inaccurately Accurate discussing the data quality of the British electoral roll seen from either a strict electoral point of view and the point of view from external use of the electoral roll.
The problem with “fitness of use” becomes clear when data quality has to be addressed within master data management. Master data has, per definition so to say, many uses.
My thesis is that there is a breakeven point when including more and more purposes where it will be less cumbersome to reflect the real world object rather than trying to align all known purposes.
Today Jim Harris made an (as ever) excellent post related to how data actually represents what it purports to represent – now and tomorrow too. Find the post called Syncing versus Streaming on the Data Roundtable.