David Loshin, president of Knowledge Integrity, Inc., is a recognized thought leader and expert consultant in the areas of data quality, master data management and business intelligence. David is a prolific author regarding data management best practices, via the expert channel at b-eye-network.com and numerous books, white papers, and web seminars on a variety of data management best practices. His book, Business Intelligence: The Savvy Manager’s Guide (June 2003) has been hailed as a resource allowing readers to “gain an understanding of business intelligence, business management disciplines, data warehousing and how all of the pieces work together.” His book, Master Data Management, has been endorsed by data management industry leaders, and his valuable MDM insights can be reviewed at mdmbook.com . David is also the author of The Practitioner’s Guide to Data Quality Improvement. He can be reached at loshin@knowledge-integrity.com.
Over my last two posts, I suggested that our expectations for data quality morph over the duration of business processes, and it is only at a point that the process has completed that we can demand that all statically-applied data quality rules be observed. However, over the duration of the
In my last post, I pointed out that we data quality practitioners want to apply data quality assertions to data instances to validate data in process, but the dynamic nature of data must be contrasted with our assumptions about how quality measures are applied to static records. In practice, the
After working in the data quality industry for a number of years, I have realized that most practitioners tend to have a rather rigid perception of the assertions about the quality of data. Either a data set conforms to the set of data quality criteria and is deemed to be acceptable
