Comments on: Best of Breed MDM versus Generalists MDM – which is better? Is that the right question? http://blogs.gartner.com/andrew_white/2009/04/15/best-of-breed-mdm-versus-generalists-mdm-%e2%80%93-which-is-better-is-that-the-right-question/ A member of the Gartner Blog Network Thu, 22 Sep 2011 13:59:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Andrew White http://blogs.gartner.com/andrew_white/2009/04/15/best-of-breed-mdm-versus-generalists-mdm-%e2%80%93-which-is-better-is-that-the-right-question/comment-page-1/#comment-102 Andrew White Thu, 16 Apr 2009 12:58:30 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/andrew_white/?p=238#comment-102 Winston, thanks for the post. I don't quite agree however with your first point; after all, what is a 'platform'? That term can mean many things. You clarify your point though - with the "can one vendor" or technology meet all the requirements? I would accept that some vendors are taking a "platform" approach in that they are building out a low level or core or infrastructural level solution (foundation?) and from there, they plan to build "up" to meet all the complex requirements that take place close to the business processes related to the master data. And that other vendors have more of a vertical stack (deep business process or business context, but narrow "foundation"). But this is just what I said, without the use of the term platform. The former is a generalist approach (one 'platform' to do it all) and the latter is a niche approach. My current thinking is that a) MDM is big and ugly, b) it is only going to grow in importance to many, many firms even if they don’t use the term, and c) there is enough business to be had (and problems are big and ugly enough) that there will be plenty of opportunities for both segments to grow, and even co-habit. I do agree with your second point. I think we are beginning to see tools named, by vendors, "governance tools" that are targeted at this master data domain independent process. If you will, this becomes a "master data management tool for all the master data management tools across the business". Put another way, this will include (my favorite statement) a "meta-master data model". Winston, thanks for the post. I don’t quite agree however with your first point; after all, what is a ‘platform’? That term can mean many things. You clarify your point though – with the “can one vendor” or technology meet all the requirements? I would accept that some vendors are taking a “platform” approach in that they are building out a low level or core or infrastructural level solution (foundation?) and from there, they plan to build “up” to meet all the complex requirements that take place close to the business processes related to the master data. And that other vendors have more of a vertical stack (deep business process or business context, but narrow “foundation”). But this is just what I said, without the use of the term platform. The former is a generalist approach (one ‘platform’ to do it all) and the latter is a niche approach.

My current thinking is that a) MDM is big and ugly, b) it is only going to grow in importance to many, many firms even if they don’t use the term, and c) there is enough business to be had (and problems are big and ugly enough) that there will be plenty of opportunities for both segments to grow, and even co-habit.

I do agree with your second point. I think we are beginning to see tools named, by vendors, “governance tools” that are targeted at this master data domain independent process. If you will, this becomes a “master data management tool for all the master data management tools across the business”. Put another way, this will include (my favorite statement) a “meta-master data model”.

]]> By: Winston Chen http://blogs.gartner.com/andrew_white/2009/04/15/best-of-breed-mdm-versus-generalists-mdm-%e2%80%93-which-is-better-is-that-the-right-question/comment-page-1/#comment-101 Winston Chen Wed, 15 Apr 2009 20:58:43 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/andrew_white/?p=238#comment-101 Andrew, I think your question is more about platforms than vendors. Many mega vendor have multiple platforms for MDM. It comes down to, is it possible to have a single technology platform that supports all the intersections of data domains and industries and use cases? Is there enough commonality between, say, product and customer, for the same MDM software to address both? I think the answer is no and I agree with your point about complexity in the market. So it is not surprising to see multiple MDM platforms in the same company and I think we'll see more and more of that. I'd also bet that governance and stewardship will become a dominant requirement, rather than the back-end, lights-out, infrastructure oriented type of MDM that has the lion-share of the market today. Backend MDM gives you consistency, but I'd argue that consistency and quality are mutually exclusive. Consistently bad data is no better than inconsistently bad data. To tackle the quality issue once and for all requires business ownership of master data. And to do that the solution cannot operate in the backend any more. Andrew, I think your question is more about platforms than vendors. Many mega vendor have multiple platforms for MDM. It comes down to, is it possible to have a single technology platform that supports all the intersections of data domains and industries and use cases? Is there enough commonality between, say, product and customer, for the same MDM software to address both? I think the answer is no and I agree with your point about complexity in the market. So it is not surprising to see multiple MDM platforms in the same company and I think we’ll see more and more of that.

I’d also bet that governance and stewardship will become a dominant requirement, rather than the back-end, lights-out, infrastructure oriented type of MDM that has the lion-share of the market today. Backend MDM gives you consistency, but I’d argue that consistency and quality are mutually exclusive. Consistently bad data is no better than inconsistently bad data. To tackle the quality issue once and for all requires business ownership of master data. And to do that the solution cannot operate in the backend any more.

]]>