Agreed on all counts
Tony,
I agree with you on all counts. I've started taking a hard line when it comes to tolerance for data integrity and it's a constant challenge. It seems like I'm notified (sometimes too late) of something taking place that, although it might make an individual process take 5 less seconds, creates massive problems down the road. As I stated elsewhere, there is a huge cultural component to this and that's the hardest kind of change to effect.
At every opportunity - whenever one of these situations arises - I don't start with the staff member violating data integrity rules. I start with the division VP explaining why the activity cannot continue and I try to start the conversations with some kind of relatable analogy. That actually worked today in a situation I had and the VP immediately got what I was saying. Although most of the people on the executive team "get" data quality, educating the rest is key in the integrity goal. Fortunately, I have the full support of the president, so that always helps.
Rarely do I simply say "no" to a request -- it might be "not right now" or "we'll put it on the list" but twice in the past year, I've simply said "no" to multiple requests that have come in to IT. These requests were intended to develop systems by which offices could work around data integrity issues. i.e." just add a field for us to do "x" and we don't need to track that data anymore... don't worry... we'll remember it." One of the requestors even had the division VP come and make the request. Again, I said no and told the VP that the only person that would change my mind on it would be the President and then, only over my objection.
Eventually, the VP understood where I was coming from... the needs of one particular office need to be weighed against everyone else's. Keep data clean needs to be a goal for every office... that's going to be hard.
Sorry I ramble.
Scott
