I was reading Jim Harris’ blog about the Requirement Flux challenge. Jim described this challenge as “when business requirements change so much while waiting for the delivery of a solution that when the solution arrives it no longer solves a problem that the business has.”
While reading this, I remembered a concept considered by the Buddhists as one of the three marks of existence. It is called Impermanence (a.k.a. Annica).
I like Sherlock Holmes.
No. I adore Sherlock Holmes, and must have read at least two or three times every story written by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
I recently had a discussion with an enterprise architect who was in the middle of a long Master Data Management program.
After listening to him explaining for one hour his impressive achievements, one thing struck my mind.
In 1972, Philip Warren Anderson, American Physicist and Nobel Laureate, published in “Science” an article that I enjoy reading regularly, as it is in my mind an importante milestone in modern science.
The title is “More is Different – Broken symmetry and the nature of the hierarchical structure of science”.
There are a few frightening scientific words and concepts in the article, but Anderson makes it simple for us to understand his point. And if you can remember a few terms or quotes, you’ll be a star at your next dinner!
In a recent post, Michele Goetz from Forrester raised the following statement: “Master Data Management Does Not Equal The Single Source Of Truth”". This remarkable post was followed by responses from Andrew White from Gartner and Lorraine Lawson.
Authoring Master Data consists in creating and modifying the content of the master data entities. Most people consider two scenarios for authoring master data. This simplified vision is tied to the traditional MDM hub styles that I have described in a previous post.
Seeing the world purely through the lens of the traditional hub styles leads to this dreadful reduction of possibilities, and obliviates some of the real-life use cases. In this post, we will discover interesting cases for authoring master data and illustrate them.
This post continues our “Back to Basics” or “Data management is simple” series.
In a previous post, I described a commonly agreed classification of data and defined the idea behind Master Data, Reference Data and Golden Data.
This Master/Reference/Golden Data is usually stored and managed in a central database called the MDM Hub.
There are various patterns or styles identified in the industry for such an MDM hub.
In a previous post, I introduced Convergence 1.3 and gave an overview of the new features enabling users to access and contribute to the MDM hub in a business-friendly way. In this post, I will provide more details about applications from the design-time perspective.
This week, Semarchy has announced the general availability of Convergence 1.3. The response to our announcement has been enormously positive.
This general availability follows a six months cycle during which we have added a brand new set of features to extend the reach of the Convergence platform, cover new customer requirements and use cases.
In this Semarchy Convergence 1.3 blog series, you will discover these new features from a different perspective. Instead of throwing a bucket of marketing concepts that would make no sense even to MDM and Data Governance experts, I will focus on facts. Continue reading
Data management is simple … once you have the big picture!
This post provides an overview of the classification of data, describes the various categories of data (reporting, transactional, master, reference and metadata) and explains why Master and Reference Data have a critical position in this organization. Continue reading
This post is the second part of a series defining the use of Agile methods (Extreme Programming, SCRUM) in the context of MDM Projects. Read the First Part Here.
Agile MDM: Challenging Differences
There are challenging differences between MDM projects and typical agile development projects. Continue reading