Progressive Customers Go For Diverse MDM Architectural Styles

I wonder how many of us ever thought about the challenges customer face around the architectural flexibility offered by a product. Redesigning the complete architecture of the project because of the product’s incompetency to accommodate different architectural styles is not less than a life changing event. It completely ruins all the hard work the team would have put for years. This is also true about the MDM projects that tend to incline towards one architecture [out of so many] and later discover to add one more data dimension to same Hub. Possible!

In Life Sciences world, there are plenty of source systems involved and good number of attributes to be mastered. These source systems may be mastering the attributes and may intend to keep mastering data at their end. But then there is threat of creating multiple data silos around that leads to data redundancy and scattered data. Creating one more Hub may post big challenges and change in the architecture too.

It would be interesting to know in what different ways can one implement the data flow from source systems to MDM Hub and vice versa. There are quite a few architectures around it, that are being used to master the data on Hub and other places. Few of the most popular architectural styles are as follows:

1. Registry Style

Registry style is mainly used for identifying the duplicates [ on real time ]. Once the duplicates are identified, it links them together in a common group. It is really light weight MDM Style of implementation and consolidation is not part of it.

2. Consolidation Style

Typically in consolidation style, the master data is consolidated in Hub. It can then be synchronized back only to data warehouse. It does consolidates [ merges ] to create single version of truth.

3. Coexistence Style

In coexistence style, data is mastered in source systems and then synchronized with Hub. This is great example of coexisting the data in source system as well as in MDM system. It does consolidates to create single version of truth.

4. Centralized Style

Mostly this shall become the choice of organizations where the Hub becomes the source of golden version of truth and mastering happens in Hub only. You turn off mastering data in any of the source systems, as it tends to create duplicates. Downstream systems can always get the master data from Hub either real time or in batch mode.

Does your MDM tool supports multiple architectural support within same HUB?

In today’s world where companies are interacting with omnichannels, the data and domain are bound to multiply. Each channel is bringing in valuable information in structured and unstructured format. The smallest part of it reveals greatest piece of information and it may get aligned to new domains.

Irrespective of architectural style chosen, there has to be a great level of flexibility offered by the MDM tool to get itself moulded in different architectural styles and fashion in this digital world.

Informatica MDM brings in this value to the table. In the past, Informatica has seen projects where the end client did not have any clue about how much their data is going to expand and they started off with Coexistence model. Later they graduated to Centralized model.

MultiArchMDM

To quote an example, one of the pharma company used Centralized style for their customer data and they turned off authoring customer data within systems like SAP. They mastered the data in MDM Hub and shared the updates with systems like SAP. But then they turned to mastering the product data and chose Coexistence model [over other models] where the product data was authored outside MDM and within MDM as well keeping the synchronization process in place.

Informatica MDM did support both these architectural styles in the same Hub and hence it differentiates itself from other MDM tools or vendors in the market. Conclusively, adaptability to different architectural styles make way for progress and this factor must be considered while putting the initial design in place.

Before ending it here, I would encourage you to use following resources to get more understanding on the topic:

https://www.informatica.com/about-us/news/news-releases/2015/11/20151113-gartner-positions-informatica-as-leader-in-2015-magic-quadrant-mdm-customer-data.html

https://www.gartner.com/doc/496732/choose-right-architectural-style-master
 

Comments