A simple example from true life and countless and projects helps. In general, all data sources in a company have their own data schema and each schema has its own individual data fields with individual data field names and individual field content, according to the interpretation of the field names and processes. In some systems, the name elements are split up into various fields like name 1, name 2, name 3 and name 4. In another system, there are two fields: first name and last name. The next system offers a name line, containing all name elements including the title. Of course each of the system is used in operational business and perfectly covering the requirements of the follow-up processes. No doubt about that.
The first potential conflict at this point is that there are many data and system owners, each of them considering their own data as the most relevant and the most correct one. From their individual point of view, a fair approach. How to solve this conflict?
In general, the discussion it is not only about the best data source; it is also about data definitions and standards. The question „how is the term customer defined“ is the most popular one, because there are several definitions in one enterprise and each of them is probably correct, always depending on the context and the point of view. That is the second potential conflict: what are the definitions of data fields and does the data meet the given definitions?
If a company decides on to get advantage from shared data and harmonized business processes to achieve operational excellence, then processes and standards have to be defined. It is of fundamental importance, that there is only one definition for each business term, that all stakeholders agree on and that each employee is aware of (or at least has access to the data dictionary and / or business glossary). The agreement on standards and definitions, the publication of them and making them present is the objective of .