Decision Rights are a key concern when it comes to Data Governance. They can be very hard to define since there are some considerations regarding data, specifically in relation to rules and standards, that must be addressed.
One issue that must be reviewed is deciding on just exactly who has the power to decide. Likewise, questions regarding when and how decisions can be made and conceptualized should also be settled. Therefore, to avoid any inconsistencies, the Data Governance program must clearly define and document all decision rights. This documentation should also include those detailed and further information on all decisions made in regards to data. These decision rights must be defined very well to avoid any conflict, specifically when it comes to settling issues.
On the other hand, decision-rights for programs related to compliance are quite easy to identify. The executive level of an organization has the power to choose if they will follow a certain standard, law or regulation; of course, these choices should be in relation to the organization’s mission and visions. Although the executive level can identify which rule to follow, it is the duty of different Data Stakeholders to discuss and come up with a general decision on how their group will comply and follow these certain rules.
Other than deciding on which rule to follow, other decisions related to data-processes need constant concession and analysis from one organization to the next. In line with this, different sectors within an organization have a specific right to decide but should be a result of thorough discussion between different data stakeholders. For example, Data Architecture has the right to decide on how long the data field will be in the new system as a result of different ideas and opinions from its stakeholders.
To identify all governing rules and regulations, to continuously protect the interests of data stakeholders and to meditate and settle any issues as a result of disobedience to the said rules and regulations are the three main mission of Data Governance. These missions of Date Governance reflect those greatly affected by the process, specifically those data stakeholders and other participants. To simply yet fully comprehend the mission and vision of Data Governance, let us take the example of on of the most common organization- a bicameral government.
Data governance operates like this kind of government with its three separate branches: the executive branch, legislative branch and the judicial branch- all having their own duties, functions, and checks & balances. For background, the legislative passes, makes and even changes laws, the judicial branch interprets these laws specifically in terms of settling and resolving issues and the executive branch makes sure that these laws are followed and reinforced while providing all services to its constituents.
On the other hand, Data Stakeholders are like citizens particularly in terms on their rights, privileges and obligations. Just like a citizen whose actions is governed by laws, Data Stakeholders should be aware that there are rules governing their actions when it comes to traveling to different data domains. And they are also liable and can be sanctioned according to the rules set by the Data Governance office.
Those in the lower level can have their own mission specifically for their type of program and data. However, these specific missions must still be in accordance or in response to the general three missions of Data Governance.
Along with mission is vision, which should also be concise and comprehensible. When crafting your program’s visions, use inspiring words that can entice and persuade Data Stakeholders to set their own data-related goals.