Data Governance and Management Survey Results
Earlier this year we launched a survey that researched data management projects and the governance of data within asset managers. The results of the survey regarding the data management projects were consistent with our recent experiences. Data projects are in the main strategic and large, with most respondents describing a multi-year, £1m + project. The respondents confirmed a near 50:50 split in using a third party product at the core of their project versus a proprietary solution.
A satisfying three quarters of respondents said that the collation, maintenance and provision of data are some of the most important operations in their business. This is a welcome position for our industry to be in, as when these data projects roll out many other functions and future projects will see the benefits of more robust and scalable data platforms.
The chart below describes the functions that are driving these large data projects. Unsurprisingly compliance with regulation is high on the agenda as is the need to provide more granular and timely data for the measurement of performance and attribution. Portfolio management is another significant driver. From our current and recent experiences this may be a result of the need to automate and standardise the treatment and processing of derivative transactions. A surprise was that 50% of respondents have investment accounting as a driver behind their project, perhaps a legacy of system upgrades or again driven by esoteric investment types.
The benefits of the projects surveyed suggest that asset managers are using data projects to centralise data management, extend coverage and provide operational scalability. Over 80% of respondents said that these were three, very key success factors. Around three quarters made meeting regulatory requirements a success factor. The chart below details these responses and highlights less than a quarter of projects were driven by avoiding data error.
Following an article published by ISC earlier this year on data governance (advertised on page 1 of this Chronicle), we extended the survey to include data governance. Our survey threw up some surprising results which confirms some of our suspicions around the governance data in that it does not receive quite the same billing as the data itself. Only 57% of respondents said a Data Governance Committee had been established and the stewardship of data by a named person(s) was only evident in 43% of cases. However, more encouragingly 71% of respondents admitted to a data strategy governing the use of data.
Our article on data governance describes the components of good data governance and the benefits that can be reaped. It is defined by ownership and usage and requires C-level membership and direction. Only 43% of our respondents said that their Data Governance Group had C-Level membership.
Good data governance moves an organisation up the data maturity ladder from ungoverned to governed data. At the top of this ladder organisations are equipped to deliver business critical projects using a single, strong, unified view of data.
In the coming weeks we will be issuing a paper on the Data Maturity Model and how asset managers can improve their data maturity.