Click here to learn more about author Ian Rowlands.

Not so long ago, it seemed that the book had been closed on Data Governance. The Operating Model was clearly defined, the issue management process was well understood, data management practices were all clear. The foundation was firm.

Now, the sands have shifted. The foundations are insecure. I was delighted to be part of a panel at the 2016 Data Governance Winter Conference chaired by Danette McGilvray (President and Principal, Granite Falls)[1] where we discussed the issues. Here’s some of the interesting points that came up.

The combined pressures of new technologies, new regulation and executive demand from value from data means that existing Data Governance practices will run out of steam. A shift to less human response in a workflow/role model and more automated policy management of data exceptions is a very likely result.

Data Governance has to become a much more “professional” activity. The notion that enthusiastic and knowledgeable I.T. And business people become Data Stewards with no clear career path has to be replaced by a process where there is a career path from entry-level Data Steward to Senior and Principal Data Steward and, in a few cases, even Chief Data Officer. There are several strands of knowledge that must be pulled together for a Data Steward (or Data Governance Officer) to be a valuable professional. Of course there is a requirement for technical and business process knowledge. There is also a need for some legal awareness (to understand regulations) and some financial savvy. The Data Governance Professionals Organization has started some work on defining the job descriptions — but there’s a need for academic institutions to start building programs to develop Data Stewards and Data Governance Officers.

Another interesting discussion is about the way businesses are changing, and about the impact of Big Data. Consider companies like Uber – companies who make access to the data their customers need “stupid easy” – so easy that it needs no thinking, and users probably don’t even consciously recognize the data access. These companies are managing data from the front-end, access, perspective – not from some back-end “corporate systems” perspective. For them, Data Governance is shifting towards what Gartner calls “Information Advocacy” – and all though the phrase is clunky, an advocate is surely going to be more popular in many companies than a “governor” – Data Professionals have to be “Yes” people, not “No people”!

We ran out of time for the panel to discuss pre-requisites for proactive “yes-focused” governance. Policy management and automation so that Data Governance can manage exceptions, certainly. But Data Intelligence will also be necessary. Without a knowledge of the data estate, a map of connections between processes and data, and a clear understanding of how data supports business activities, Data Governance won’t just be a matter of being agile on shifting sands — but of being sucked into a lethal quicksand of crisis management!

[1] The other panelists were Sunil Soares (Founder and Managing Partner, Information Asset, LLC), Rex Ahlstrom, (Chief Strategy Officer, Back Office Associates) and Anne Buff, (Principal Business Solutions Manager, SAS)