How is the US Federal Data Strategy doing?
I be taught with good curiosity a report from Grant Thornton and the Data Foundation that is ‘state of the union’ for the US Federal Data Strategy. Here it is: On the maturation of data governance in U.S. Federal companies. I found the report helpful as a typical report on what’s taking place. But I actually really feel that the summary pulls it’s punches. I really feel it fails to call out important factors that have to be addressed if the targets of the Federal Data Strategy are to be achieved. There is additional notion on this text: Federal CDOs Seek More Guidance on Government’s Data Strategy.
The Report
Overall the report signifies that CDOs need further funding. They need further readability from the OMB on their operate and obligations. They are doing successfully organising the framework for data governance, data cataloging, and some data administration efforts. The report makes you assume they’re doing okay.
Quite rightly the core message of the Federal Data Strategy is that CDOs ought to help enterprise leaders improve their decision making capabilities. How that is achieved with data and data catalogs, with none recourse or reference to analytics, is previous me. There is an precise important trigger why we title ourselves, “Data and Analytics”. Data powers movement and analysis; analytics powers selections. A CDO that does not embrace analytics is fighter with one arm tied behind their once more.
Data governance as predicable as ever
Then as soon as extra, what do you assume happens to a information governance program that focuses on data? Or necessities, cataloging data factors, guidelines and construction? The data governance effort federal companies are engaged on is not the data governance they need. It seems all to acquainted with packages peddled in the Nineteen Eighties.
Data governance packages should grow to be data and analytics governance packages. They should align to data (and analytics) strategies that prize enterprise outcomes above all else. As such, governance efforts must first give consideration to enterprise selections and outcomes. The federal efforts look to be on shaky flooring, based mostly on the report.
What Works and Doesn’t
Our evaluation (seven or further years surveying the D&A pacesetter operate) has known as this drawback out for numerous years. There is data suggesting numerous patterns – D&A Leaders (equal to CDOs, CDAOs or equivalents) that:
- Only private data and by no means analytics are inclined to battle to understand enterprise affect
- Own data and analytics approach, literacy, governance and prioritization, are inclined to do greater than individuals who don’t.
- Avoid battle with CIOs who normally would possibly private execution moreover are inclined to do greater than individuals who don’t.
Here is a smattering of our latest survey findings:
- CDO Agenda 2022: Pull Ahead By Focusing on Value, Talent and Culture
- CDO Agenda 2021: Influence and Impact of Successful CDOs in the Sixth Annual CDO Survey
- Survey Analysis: Fifth Annual CDO Survey — Growth Must Continue in Order to Achieve Real Impact
The report does ask for readability in the CDO operate. Perhaps the OMB is not sending a clear, straightforward message. Is analytics part of the commonplace federal firm CDO job operate?
It’s in the Name
Perhaps it’s the title. The time interval Chief Data Officer might counsel a give consideration to data (or perhaps digital) and it couldn’t embrace analytics. This would make sense for these of us who have to deal with what is the distinction between data, and analytics. The degree is that the operate or label is not that important. What is important is the scope of accountability. Our evaluation has been clear for a couple of years now. Whatever the title of the operate, there have to be one D&A pacesetter. That D&A pacesetter ought to private D&A, not data alone. Perhaps a further inclusive title might help…
The submit How is the US Federal Data Strategy doing? appeared first on Andrew White.