Over in the world of banking, researchers say there could be up to $10bn savings from implementing the Legal Entity Identifier (LEI). Yet only 17% of surveyed firms say they have clear responsibilities for implementing.
The article I read on this suggests Corporate Data Officers (CDOs) are unclear about their role in dealing with regulatory change. I wonder if the problem is more fundamental. For one thing, few organizations have CDOs, and among those organizations which do have them, I'm not convinced the title means as much as it could.
We're struggling with the familiar issue of data's apparent origins in technology. “Data” is a nerdy word. “Data processing” was and is a technical activity. And so we keep trying to make the argument that IT folks – data professionals – must move over to the business, or align better with the business.
But the reality is that data always belonged to the business. Technologists never originated data, they just looked after it. The business never really lost ownership to the techies.
If a CDO's job is to mean anything at all, it must at least mean identification and enforcement of data standards across the organization. If a regulatory requirement points to the need for implementing a standard, then I don't see how there can be any confusion. There's only going to be doubt if the CDO somehow gets the impression that he or she isn't really at the big table, taking business decisions. Banking Technology
Comments