Data Management maturity models: a comparative analysis

From the first glance, you can see that there are seven key Subject Areas where the Subject domains are located. These are:

• Data
• Data and System Design
• Technology, Governance
• Data Quality
• Security
• Related Capabilities.

You can see that the difference in approaches to define the key Domains are rather big. It is not the purpose of this article to deliver a detailed analysis, but there is one striking observation I would like to share: the Subject domains and deliverables of these domains are being mixed with one another.  For example, let us have a look at Data governance. The domain ‘Data governance’ exists in four different models. Some other domains like ‘Data management strategy’, that appears in three models, is considered as a deliverable of Data Governance domain in other models, for example in DAMA model.

Such a big difference of opinions on key Subject domains is rather confusing.

Subject domain dimensions

Subject domain dimensions are characteristics of (sub-) domains. It is important to know them as they form a base for the description for Domain artifacts and maturity levels.  For a business capability models, for example, the key dimensions are: roles, processes, information and tools.

Only in case of the models of DAMA and Stanford, the information about the dimensions is available. DAMA model specifies Activity, Tools, Standards and People and Resources. Stanford has come up with People, Policies, Capabilities.  So, you can see that even if you compare these two models, there is no alignment.

DM maturity artifacts

The artifact is the last component of DM maturity model. The description of artifacts, or in other words, the description of the level of maturity per Subject (sub-)domain and Subject dimensions, could only be found in the DCAM and Stanford models. Taking into account that Subject domains and their domains are different, it is hardly possible to compare outcomes of different models.

Continue reading >>>