Ground Rules for Data Usage: Governance & Data Usage Series Part 2
Guidelines for the various functions within an organization
In our previous part of the series, we talked about the core items that make up the “sweet spot” of balancing agility & governance in companies (if you haven’t read that yet, you can do so by clicking here).
Before we dive into the meat of this blog, which is about the guidelines for different functions within an organization, here is the summary of the core things you'll need to set ground rules & indicate responsibility for governance across the company:
A company-wide data dictionary
A company-wide data strategy
Documented review processes for different levels of reporting
(Recommended) Data discrepancy one-sheets
If you have these four assets, you're already more data mature than many large companies; if you want to learn more about how to make your processes even more robust and the details on the "how," read on!
Ground Rules By Function
Board & Public Facing Analysis
Data shared with the board of directors should be ruled with an iron fist. Any incorrect data shared with the board or the public can harm a company and jeopardize your position as a director or C-level.
What does that mean for data that gets analyzed (and shared) for the board and above?
The Ground Rules:
Company-wide governance - no one should be able to put anything on a board deck without governance knowing about the data sources and its strengths and flaws.
The sources of data should be controlled to the most accurate sources. Digital data is never 100% accurate, but some sources are closer to the P&L truth than others. Finance data should always be used for revenue numbers, and any data blends should be carefully evaluated for the true meaning of metrics.
Several validation layers should exist before that data is shown to the board. Multiple teams should review the correctness; multiple data leaders should debate and interpret the insights given. No one analyst should work on a project for the board, and the team that is assigned should check their sources, queries, and final results multiple times.
Only data leadership and the leaders presenting to the board (and of course, the army of analysts supporting it) should be able to see this data and the results before the board does.
While more people in a company may have access to some of the individual data sources that could be used in a board deck (and likely should if they are the most accurate or closest to the company's source of truth), the overall access (and ability to recommend) should remain as the data that does deserve near-paralyzing governance and process around it.
“The overall access (and ability to recommend) should remain as the data that does deserve near-paralyzing governance and process around it.”
One final note on the board of directors data & presenting it - since this process should be stringent, it’s ideal to create a year-long project timeline for when board of directors information is due so you can book resources and review periods well before that time.
The last thing you want is to be a month out of a board of directors meetings (or less) and ask for data reviews.
C-Level Reporting
The C-level is where excellent analysis can completely transform a company. Suppose an analytics team is effectively presenting options to the executive suite that helps them inform decisions with high-quality data. In that case, the business can innovate quickly and hit its goals (or understand why it didn't hit them) much better than a business that doesn't deliver to the C-level. It's also one of the hardest things to get right.
Sometimes, we send huge reports to executives that they never read. Or, much time is lost fulfilling executive requests and having them ask for more information (because we missed the context the first time). And the worst option of how it goes wrong is when the C-suite needs to get served the data they need and relies entirely on their gut or information in passing to determine goals and strategic decisions.
The Ground Rules:
Focus on business context above all else - team members should be dedicated to listening to what questions their CMO, CEO, and CIO are asking and focus on answering those exact questions with the data.
If you cannot deliver timely insights because your process for reviewing data is too restrictive or there is only one team with a huge backlog that can access the data, consider a change to make this less of a sticking point. This is where agilility matters. Careful governance and processes are still required because, often, a C-level will take these insights to the board of directors.
Ensure reviews take place by at least two teams before it hits the C-level, or at least the data sources should be reviewed carefully and approved as C-level data.
Directors and Managers
Directors and managers (especially those in analytical roles) will likely have access to a wealth of data sources, and their employees can serve them almost any information they need. They may have access to individual platforms that they own and might not have access to the main financial database.
This can cause some issues - directors often speak to the C-level and field their requests. So, sometimes they don't easily have access to the data they need directly, and they also might have access that has helpful information to their group but isn't something that you would need to show to the C-level.
Some ground rules:
Have a clear metrics governance process shared across the entire organization that shows the definitions & data sources for C-level and above approved metrics. Ensure that directors are trained on this usage and aware of the restrictions on other sources.
Create checks & balances for any major reporting that ensures the director of analytics & finance confirm any performance numbers before they go to the C-level. One common issue is that other departments will take numbers (and their interpretation) into their own hands without the oversight of data committees.
Directors should be at the forefront of any data literacy training - they are the ones that review their team's work and also get asked the hard questions by their bosses (the C-suite and VPs). If there are gaps in data literacy in the organization, the most significant issues are often caused at the director level.Directors are the ones who can make or break both the upwards discussions and downward discussions if they distrust data or need help understanding it.
Execution Level
Execution level - where most of the hard work really happens. Execution-level employees need easy access to platforms related to their job functions. If they're in marketing, they likely have access to your digital analytics tools and advertising platforms. There is a balance between enabling team members to access the data and education they need to do their jobs and maintaining careful access management.
It's also important for the director levels to support their direct reports when it comes to reporting - that means making sure the right processes are being followed for data validation and not putting their team members in a position where they feel pressured to share data to the C-levels without sound reasoning why (and the confidence that they are looking at the right metrics from the data dictionary).
Some ground rules:
Aside from finance execution level employees, access to financial databases or customer databases with PII should be carefully monitored or restricted.
Ensure team access is duplicated so no one loses access to the individual platforms they manage - primarily when these platforms feed into the bigger databases that your company relies on.
Directors should observe any policies and educate their teams on the policies and processes. If a presentation needs to go to the director of finance or analytics before it can be shown to anyone else, the director should support that process by giving their team enough time to produce their reports and get them to the appropriate review departments in time.
Conclusion
While working out these details and getting buy-in from the organization can seem like a lot, having these processes in place can completely transform the data culture of your organization. Instead of constant fights and politics that lead to an erosion of work quality, you can have transparent processes that make everyone's work easier.
Your data teams will be able to produce more value, and more people will understand the "why" behind some of the madness, like extreme controls on data that goes to the board of directors.
If you have any questions or want to learn more about data strategy and governance processes, you can contact our team below!
Resources you might like:
Let’s get squeezing!
Join our founder on Linkedin and hear thought-leadership on marketing analytics and analytics consulting.
“[Insight Lime] are great at identifying the issues and providing a solution.”
Search for more blogs and content you’ll love
Need more help calculating the impact of your offers? We’re here to help 💚
Let’s get squeezing!
Join our founder on Linkedin and hear thought-leadership on marketing analytics and analytics consulting.