Stay or go
In some cases, the decisions on which data to keep and which to discard are being made for companies. Industry regulators place demands on enterprises to retain data for certain periods of time, as do corporate lawyers concerned about e-discovery and the need to produce email and other historical records for litigation. In other cases, age-old data retention policies for different corporate systems keep chugging along, together with their individual policies on data retention.
Beyond these, however, many organizations still face a bottomless data chasm that is a challenge to excavate.
Behind this decision making is an almost instinctive drive to throw all of this old data away, at the same time that there is inherent fear that the data may somehow, someday be needed.How do organizations get on top of this dilemma?
Research and analytics firm McKinsey talks about the need for a "plan for assembling and integrating data that's frequently horizontally siloed across business units or vertically by function." This data might exist in numerous internal legacy systems, or in combination with new, unstructured data coming in from social media, machines, and other Web sources.
"Making this information a useful and long-lived asset will often require a large investment in new data capabilities. Plans may highlight a need for the massive reorganization of data architectures over time, sifting through tangled repositories, and implementing data governance standards that systematically maintain accuracy."
McKinsey suggests that for the immediate future, companies could outsource the process of sorting through this data accumulation to data specialists who use cloud-based solutions to unify enough data into blocks of actionable information that can facilitate corporate analytics.
The strategy might work. However, organizations will still be left with the persistent decisions of which data they should save forever and which they should throw away. If they make the decision to retain more data in a semi-permanent fashion, they will also need to pay for it by investing in storage for long-term data archiving.
At the same time, CIOs are likely to find few allies when it comes to longer term investments in data custodianship - and even fewer sympathizers for historical data cleansing, integrations and archeological expeditions that aren't absolutely necessarily for big data projects.
The dilemma may well provide a tipping point to cloud-based storage that at last trumps corporate worries about data security and protection in the cloud!
A cloud-based storage strategy for your old data could well prove to be more economical than continuing to keep all of your old data in mothballs on data center storage.
Secondly, moving archival data to the cloud (even if the data is largely unknown until it can be assessed) provides pain relief from having this data onsite and in a state of stasis until a unique big data trends projects beckons for it.
Mary E. Shacklett is president of Transworld Data, a technology research and market development firm. Prior to founding the company, Mary was Senior Vice President of Marketing and Technology at TCCU, Inc., a financial services firm; Vice President of Product Research and Software Development for Summit Information Systems, a computer software company; and Vice President of Strategic Planning and Technology at FSI International, a multinational manufacturing company in the semiconductor industry. Mary is a keynote speaker and has more than 1,000 articles, research studies, and technology publications in print.