Data matching has increasingly become a component of Master Data Management (MDM) solutions. This has mostly been the case for MDM of customer data solutions, but it is also a component of MDM of product data solutions not at least when these solutions are emerging into the multi-domain MDM space.
The deployment of data matching was discussed nearly 5 years ago in the post Deploying Data Matching.
While MDM solutions since then have been picking up on the share of the data matching being done around it is still a fairly small proportion of data matching that is performed within MDM solutions. Even if you have a MDM solution with data matching capabilities, you might still consider where data matching should be done. Some considerations I have come across are:
Acquisition and silo consolidation circumstances
A common use case for data matching is as part of an acquisition or internal consolidation of data silos where two or more populations of party master data, product master data and other important entities are to be merged into a single version of truth (or trust) in terms of uniqueness, consistency and other data quality dimensions.
While the MDM hub must be the end goal for storing that truth (or trust) there may be good reasons for doing the data matching before the actual on-boarding of the master data.
These considerations includes
- Ability to handle a large batch of data as mentioned in the post Testing a Data Matching Tool
- Inclusion of external data in the matching logic as examined in the post Some Depuplication Tactics
- The actual matching effectiveness as explored in the post 3 out of 10
The point of entry
The MDM solution isn’t for many good reasons not always the system of entry. To do the data matching at the stage of data being put into the MDM hub may be too late. Expanding the data matching capabilities as Service Oriented Architecture component may be a better way as pondered in the post Service Oriented Data Quality.
Avoiding data matching
Even being a long time data matching practitioner I’m afraid I have to bring up the subject of avoiding data matching as further explained in the post The Good, The Better and The Best Way of Avoiding Duplicates.





Such problems with changing purposes of use for product master data is not only a luxury problem at Harrods but a common challenge within retail and distribution. The challenge involve having customer friendly product descriptions, a range of atomized product attributes that varies by product category and having related digital assets that helps the customer.
But what about MDM solutions themselves? Are MDM solutions that smug that they don’t take in good capabilities from other MDM solutions?
The importance of hierarchical completeness, not at least within Product Information Management (PIM), has become close to me again.