Mastering Data Management

More in Business Process Management

• Improving Business Processes with MDM
• Mobility: Inventing the New Division of Labor
• Take Charge of your Data Environment: IBM Performance Management Solutions
• Top 5 InfoSphere Demos at IOD

More in MDM

• Top Books for your MDM Library
• Recent Reads: MDM & Data Governance
• Big Data Governance: A Framework
• Predictive Data Governance for Business Transformation

More from Marty Moseley

• IAIDQ Blog Carnival: Data Fitness & Garbage
• Mind the Gap and Do Data Governance Better
• Measuring Data Governance: Metrics that Matter
• Measuring Data Governance: How Do You Know You’ve Made a Difference?

Share this Post

Recent Comments

• Lorraine Fernandes on Response: A Universal Identifier Isn’t a Silver Bullet
• Henrik Liliendahl Sørensen on Response: A Universal Identifier Isn’t a Silver Bullet
• Response: A Universal Identifier Isn’t a Silver Bullet | Mastering Data Management on 3 Best Practices in Identity Management

With so many pros and cons for each of the three MDM models, how can you choose?

We’ve discussed the basics and benefits of multidomain MDM and outlined each of the three main architecture models: registry, hybrid and centralized. With all this information, though, how do you take the next step and choose which is actually best for your organization?

As we’ve discussed, an experienced enterprise architect can really help you decide which architectural style makes the most sense. Enterprise architects have the requisite skills to define the characteristics of the system and to evaluate how specific business needs can and will be addressed by a chosen model today and in the future.

However, here are some generalities:

The optimal multidomain MDM architectural style, for most organizations, will either be a registry or hybrid model. Both are easier to scale and perform better with large data sets than a centralized approach.

When deciding between the two, the choice will often depend on how rapidly transactions need to be processed, how much the data volumes will grow, the sheer number of contributing systems, the stability of the data models supported and how well external systems will adapt to the MDM style chosen.

Enterprises that require real-time availability will most likely choose a hybrid model because of the latency issues associated with the registry approach. If real-time access is not a critical criterion and the master data object is likely to evolve or change over time, then a registry approach will be more efficient and offer greater flexibility.

A centralized approach is best suited for a smaller, stable organization with low transaction and volume requirements. Companies should avoid falling victim to choosing a centralized approach just because they can create the entire set of structures inside a single database. For most organizations, a centralized approach is not the best choice (for reasons cited).

Each of these three styles is not right or wrong in and of themselves, only in the context of an organization’s present and future business needs. This is why a careful business analysis is critical for identifying which style may be preferred over another.

Since there are always compromises, organizations selecting a multidomain MDM architecture should actively involve an enterprise architect in the process to help them think through the business cases that they will be dealing with both today and tomorrow.

Some organizations, depending on which business problems they are trying to solve, may ultimately deploy all three types of multidomain MDM architectural styles. Each style may be used to solve a different business problem and may be the optimal choice for that specific use case.

Which have you seen implemented? Share your case studies in the comments.

This post is part of Marty Moseley's Multidomain MDM Series. View the table of contents for links to any parts you may have missed.