STRATEGY LEADERSHIP CONSULTING DIGITAL DATA EVENTS

ENGAGE 


Data Governance Maturity Model Home / Data / Data Governance Maturity Model

Email Newsletter

Subscribe to our free Newsletter to

receive exclusive content, event
announcements and insights directly
in your Inbox

 First Name *

 Last Name *
 Data Governance Maturity  Email Address

Model  Please select your current location


A methodology to appraise organizations' Data Governance capabilities
SUBMIT

 Previous Next 

Table Of Contents 

1. Data Governance Maturity

2. Data Governance Maturity Models
3. IBM Data Governance Maturity Model
3.1 Level 1: Initial
3.2 Level 2: Managed
 3.3 Level 3: Defined
3.4 Level 4: Quantitatively managed
3.5 Level 5: Optimizing
 4. Gartner Data Governance Maturity Model
4.1 Level 0: Unaware
4.2 Level 1: Aware
4.3 Level 2: Reactive
4.4 Level 3: Proactive
4.5 Level 4: Managed
4.6 Level 5: Effective
5. Stanford Data Governance Maturity Model
6. Oracle Data Governance Maturity Model
6.1 Milestone one: None (level 0)
6.2 Milestone two: Initial (level 1)
6.3 Milestone three: Managed (level 2)
6.4 Milestone four: Standardized (level 3)
6.5 Milestone five: Advanced (level 4)
6.6 Milestone six: Optimized (level 5)
6.7 Phase 1: Explore
 6.8 Phase 2: Expand
6.9 Phase 3: Transform
7. TDWI’s Data Governance Maturity Model
 7.1 Level 1: Prenatal
7.2 Level 2: Infant
7.3 Gulf
7.4 Level 3: Child
7.5 Level 4: Teenager
7.6 Chasm
7.7 Level 5: Adult
7.8 Level 6: Sage
7.9 Organizational Imperatives
7.10 Technical Imperatives
8. DataFlux Maturity Model
8.1 Level 1: Undisciplined
8.2 Level 2: Reactive
8.3 Level 3: Proactive
8.4 Level 4: Governed
9. Open Universiteit Nederland Maturity Model
 9.1 Level 1: No process
9.2 Level 2: Beginning process
9.3 Level 3: Established process
 9.4 Level 4: Managed process
9.5 Level 5: Optimizing process
10. Ovaledge Data Governance Maturity Model
10.1 Level 1: Unaware
10.2 Level 2: Aware
10.3 Level 3: Defined
10.4 Level 4: Implemented
10.5 Level 5: Optimized
11. Kalido Data Governance Maturity Model
11.1 Level 1: Application-Centric
11.2 Level 2: Enterprise Repository-Centric
11.3 Level 3: Policy-Centric
12. Level 4: Fully Governed
13. DMM Maturity Model
13.1 Level 1: Ad hoc
 Idea in short 

A Data Governance Maturity Model is a methodology to measure organizations' Data Governance initiatives. Data
 Governance Maturity Models help organizations understand their current data capabilities, identify vulnerabilities
and uncover improvement areas. A high maturity level indicates significant data capabilities, while a low maturity
level indicates a need for substantial improvement.

1. Data Governance Maturity

Data Governance Maturity refers to the stage an organization has reached in the implementation and adoption of Data
Governance initiatives. An organization with low Data Governance maturity will have substantial amounts of
unorganized data and will not be leveraging this data to achieve business outcomes. In contrast, an organization with
higher maturity levels recognize the importance of data as a strategic organizational asset and will invest resources to
appropriately govern and manage it.

When organizations reach the highest level of Data Governance maturity, they will see tangible outcomes that are
directly attributed to their Data Management and Governance efforts. The organization will better deploy its data
assets to drive decision-making, increase revenues, engage with customers, develop compelling products and services,
 drive innovate and collaborate with internal and external stakeholders, while enhancing their compliance posture and
bottom-line.


2. Data Governance Maturity Models
A Data Governance maturity model is methodology to measure organizations Data Governance initiatives. In mature
organizations, the processes to source, manage, access, use and innovate using data assets are in place. Less
advanced organizations can use the maturity model to develop a roadmap of initiatives and capabilities that will help
them evolve their Data maturity.

There are several popular Data Governance Maturity Models from IBM, Stanford, Gartner, Oracle, etc. These models
provide guidance how organizations can effectively manage their data assets to achieve their organizational outcomes.
However, considering the diverse nature of organizations, there is no one-size-fits-all model that suits all organizations
for data maturity appraisal. Furthermore, none of the maturity models provide the details and concrete initiatives that
organizations should launch to evolve their maturity levels. Hence, organizations should choose an appropriate model
that reflects their challenges and customize the model to suit their unique needs.

3. IBM Data Governance Maturity Model

 The IBM Data Governance Maturity Model is one the most widely recognized. Developed in 2007, the model is
designed to help you determine your progress across 11 core Data Governance areas. These include data awareness
and organizational structure, data policy, data stewardship, data quality management, data lifecycle management, IT
 security and privacy, data architecture, data classification, compliance, value creation, and auditing.

3.1. Level 1: Initial

Limited to no data processes or governance
Data management is ad-hoc and reactive
There are no formal procedures for tracking data
Deadlines are missed and project budgets are exceeded

3.2. Level 2: Managed

Users are aware of the business value of data
Several data projects, such as mapping data infrastructure, are underway
There is a small degree of automation
Measures for regulating data have been agreed upon and are available
Data teams are beginning to focus on metadata
 3.3. Level 3: Defined
Data policies are well-defined
 Some data stewards have been identified and appointed
There is some data management technology in use
A data integration plan is being worked on
Users are sharing and understanding data management processes
Master data management is commonplace
Data quality risk assessment measures are in use

3.4. Level 4: Quantitatively managed

Data policies are well-defined
Enterprise-level Data Governance measures are in place
Well-defined data quality goals are in place
Data models are readily available
Data governance principles drive all data projects
Performance management is live and underway

3.5. Level 5: Optimizing

 Data management costs are reduced
Automation is commonplace
Clear and comprehensive data management principles are adopted company-wide
 Data governance is part of company culture
It’s standard practice to calculate and track ROI on data projects

4. Gartner Data Governance Maturity Model

Another widely recognized model is the Gartner Data Governance maturity model. Since 2008, the Gartner model has
enabled enterprises to achieve five major goals:

Company-wide data integration

Content unification
Master data domain integration
Unhindered information channels
Metadata management

4.1. Level 0: Unaware

There is no Data Governance, data ownership, or accountability in place
 There are no processes or architecture in place for information sharing
There is no standardization or metadata management
Most archiving and document sharing is completed via email
 There is no unification and data is fragmented
Important business decisions are made using inadequate information

4.2. Level 1: Aware

The absence of data owners is apparent
Business leaders acknowledge the lack of support for Enterprise Information Management (EIM)
The value of data is becoming apparent
There is a degree of awareness surrounding data quality issues
There is awareness surrounding the need for standardized data policies and processes
There is awareness of redundant reports and inefficient BI processes
The risks of not having EIM in place are becoming clear

4.3. Level 2: Reactive

Organizations understand the value of company data
Data is beginning to be shared across departments, projects, and systems
 Data quality processes are reactive
Policies have been created but adoption is low
Data information and retention assessment processes are being developed

4.4. Level 3: Proactive
Data stewards and owners are identified and active
Collaboration is recognized as a key enterprise process
Roles and governance models are confirmed
There is company-wide compliance with governance protocols
Data governance is integral to every project’s development and deployment
Operational risks are reduced

4.5. Level 4: Managed

There is an enterprise-wide acceptance that data is critical
Data policies have been developed, initiated, and are well understood
A Data Governance body has been created
Data metrics are well-defined and accessible
 4.6. Level 5: Effective
Utilizing data and managing information is seen to provide a competitive advantage
 There are service level agreements (SLAs) in place
Achieving productivity targets and risk reduction are two goals linked to EIM strategies
The team responsible for EIM is well-established and active
Core EIM goals have been achieved

5. Stanford Data Governance Maturity Model

Developed in 2011 by Stanford University’s Data Governance Office, the model was adapted from other models, such
as IBM’s and CMM’s. It is based on the structure of their Data Governance program , with a focus on both
foundational and project aspects of Data Governance.

The foundational aspects focus on measuring core Data Governance competencies and development of critical
program resources, as follows:

Awareness: The extent to which individuals within the organization have knowledge of the roles, rules, and
technologies associated with the Data Governance program.
Formalization: The extent to which roles are structured in an organization and the activities of the employees are
governed by rules and procedures.
 Metadata: Data that describes other data and IT assets (such as databases, tables and applications) by relating
essential business and technical information; and data which facilitates the consistent understanding of the
characteristics and usage of data. Technical metadata describes data elements and other IT assets as well as their
 use, representation, context and interrelations. Business metadata answers who, what, where, when, why and how
for users of the data and other IT assets.

The project grouping measure how effectively Data Governance concepts are applied in the course of funded projects:

Stewardship: The formalization of accountability for the definition, usage, and quality standards of specific data
assets within a defined organizational scope.
Data Quality: The continuous process for defining the parameters for specifying acceptable levels of data quality
to meet business needs, and for ensuring that data quality meets these levels.
Master Data: Business-critical data that is highly shared across the organization. Master data are often codified
data, data describing the structure of the organization or key data entities (such as “patient”, “employee”, or
“student”).

Next, the following three dimensions further subdivide each of the mentioned six maturity components:

People: Roles and organization structures.

Policies: Development, auditing and enforcement of data policies, standards and best practices.
Capabilities: Enabling technologies and techniques.
 Stanford also provides guiding questions for each of the six components across the three dimensions, which are very
useful in maturity assessment.


6. Oracle Data Governance Maturity Model
Oracle states that Data Governance “does not come together all at once” and an iterative approach is needed. To guide
organizations in their approaches, Oracle developed its own maturity model to assess the current state maturity of the
Data Governance capability. Its model is comprised of 6 levels, or milestones:

6.1. Milestone one: None (level 0)

No formal governance processes, policies, standards, etc. are in place
Data is a by-product of their applications

6.2. Milestone two: Initial (level 1)

IT has some authority over the data, but has limited influence on business processes which don’t consider the
benefits of Data Governance
There is some business and IT collaboration, but it is inconsistent across the enterprise as it is more project based
Data champions are present in different business areas
 6.3. Milestone three: Managed (level 2)
A few business areas/ departments/ units have data owners and data stewards
 Some processes are defined at a high level around key systems
Data problems are dealt with reactively, without addressing their root cause
Standards are starting to be put together at the department or system level

6.4. Milestone four: Standardized (level 3)

The roles of data stewards are explicitly defines and appointed
Cross-functional teams are formed to tackle Data Governance
Processes and standards are consistently established across departments
A centralized repository of data policies is established
Data quality measures are defined, monitored, and improved

Avoid losing track of data quality issues. Here is a free data quality issues log.

6.5. Milestone five: Advanced (level 4)

Data governance organizational structure is enterprise-wide
 Data governance is viewed as critical to business across all functions
Quantitative goals for processes and data quality are set and met
Ownership of data quality and metadata as well as data policy making, lies with the business

6.6. Milestone six: Optimized (level 5)
Data governance is core to the business process and projects
Decisions are informed by data which provide quantifiable benefit/ cost/ risk analysis
Processes and policies are firmly established and adopted and continually revised to reflect business goals and
objectives

Oracle advocates for the adoption of an on-going program and a continuous improvement process, with milestones to
guide the way. To increase maturity, it recommends a three phase approach to Data Governance:

6.7. Phase 1: Explore

Build a solid Data Governance foundation and create Data Governance leaders. The key activities are:

Understand and prioritize Data Governance needs

Assess where business improvement can bring the most benefit
Create a planning document for implementation
 Create or select a framework to ensure the confidentiality, quality, integrity of the data
Define the mission and vision for the program
Establish and define goals, metrics, success measures, and funding strategies
 Define data standards, policies, process, etc.
Establish a Data Governance council
Create a Data Governance communication plan

6.8. Phase 2: Expand

Include extending Data Governance coverage from local project implementation to department/ division level. Think
globally and act collaboratively cross-division. The key activities are:

Establish a centralized data repository

Enforce data quality evaluation and automation
Deploy tools for more complex data quality improvements
Adopt more sophisticated and comprehensive data security tools, processes, and policies
Create the process for dealing with data modeling and data architecture changes

6.9. Phase 3: Transform

 Enterprise-wide Data Governance is established. The key activities are:

Develop automated data quality dashboards

Optimize Data Governance processes

Evaluate and communicate the data asset valuation results to the enterprise
The business intelligence landscape has Data Governance at its foundation
Manage new data service consumer agreements
Create service level agreements (SLAs) around data sharing and data usage

7. TDWI’s Data Governance Maturity Model

Published in July 2008, the TDWI’s Data Governance maturity model appeared in a white paper on the four imperatives
of Data Governance maturity. The model has 6 levels, similar to Oracle’s Data Governance maturity model or the 2008
Gartner EIM maturity model, as well as 2 gaps. As you can see, these levels can be compared to the life stages of a
human. TDWI actually refers to them as life-cycle stages. Here they are:

7.1. Level 1: Prenatal

At this stage, there are mostly manual and ad-hoc solutions to a business or technology problem.
 7.2. Level 2: Infant
Business requirements lead to a technology or practice and have a proof-of-concept

7.3. Gulf
Organization needs to institutionalize the solution concepts

7.4. Level 3: Child

Expansion of the new technology or practice it committed to

7.5. Level 4: Teenager

Growth slows down as it occurs in a few departments or shortlist of IT systems

7.6. Chasm
Enterprise adoption or solution re-architecture

7.7. Level 5: Adult

 Continue maturing solution best practices and technology implementations

7.8. Level 6: Sage


Cross-departmental coordination and technology scalability

TDWI also has a list of 4 domains or Data Governance imperatives and they are action items. 2 fall under organizational
imperative and 2 under technical imperatives.

7.9. Organizational Imperatives

1. Maintain a cross-functional team and process
2. Align with data-intense business initiatives

7.10. Technical Imperatives

1. Govern data usage via technical implementations, and
2. Automate Data Governance process via technical implementations
The imperatives, as a group, imply a time sequence. For example, it’s obvious that imperative 1 must create a cross-
functional team before imperative 2 can align team goals with business initiatives. Less obvious is that imperative 3
should be governing IT systems before imperative 4 starts using IT systems to automate governance processes.
 Although dependencies like these determine an order for commencing the imperatives, the imperatives must
eventually coexist and interact. In the TDWI Data Governance maturity model, each of the 4 Data Governance
imperative goes through the 6 levels and 2 gaps outlined above.

TDWI indicates that most organizations are in these middle levels, child and teenager, and that one requires a
considerable effort to cross over the chasm and head into the adult and sage levels. As a note, you will be able to find
the same life-cycle stages (or levels) being used in other types of models from TDWI such as Business Intelligence and
Data Analytics, and Big Data so you will encounter this breakdown in other areas.

8. DataFlux Maturity Model

Developed by DataFlux in 2007, it was based on their years of experience in developing the core components of Data
Governance technology. First presented in their white paper [1]. It had since been revised and updated to include the
business perspective that drives the need for managing data as an asset, besides the technology adoption at each
phase. The model has 4 levels of maturity with the following characteristics:

8.1. Level 1: Undisciplined

Little or no rules and policies on data quality and integration
Redundant data across multiple different data sources, format and records meeting similar purposes
 High risk of lost opportunities and incorrect decisions due to poor data quality

8.2. Level 2: Reactive


Data rules and policies are created at department level
Data quality is also mostly addressed at department level
Still a lot of poor data quality enterprise-wide

8.3. Level 3: Proactive

The value of a centralized view of information and knowledge is understood at the enterprise level
A data culture is beginning to be adopted across departments

8.4. Level 4: Governed

Data and information is unified
The data strategy and framework is well established and understood
Everyone understands information is a key enterprise asset

Each of these phases is evaluated against four major dimensions:

 1. People
2. Policies
3. Technology
 4. Risk
The model offers their characteristics at each stage and proposes what needs to be addressed to advanced to the
next. Higher levels of maturity yields greater information and knowledge rewards and reductions in risks. The Reactive
level is where a Data Governance program is put together. Moving out of the Reactive into the Proactive one is a difficult
step. This usually takes 4-5 years.

9. Open Universiteit Nederland Maturity Model

Published in 2015 by Jan Merkus as part of research for the Open Universiteit Nederland. It is based on the following
maturity levels of the Capability Maturity Model (CMM), but applied to the domain of Data Governance.

9.1. Level 1: No process

No process at all or no formally organized process, ad-hoc activities only

9.2. Level 2: Beginning process

 There are attempts for a process, but it’s not consistently documented and it’s mostly reactive

9.3. Level 3: Established process


A formalized process is in place used across the organization, but it is not highly detailed or all encompassing

9.4. Level 4: Managed process

A formalized process is well established with a clear ownership, which is regularly measured, monitored, controlled,
audited and analysed

9.5. Level 5: Optimizing process

The overall process is deeply integrated within other business and technical processes as well as within the culture of
the organization, it’s mostly automated, continually improving and adapting and constantly reviewed with data
stakeholders

The model comes with a self-assessment tool and score for the following dimensions, each with its own set of
qualifications, against the 5 maturity levels outlined above:

Corporate governance
 Risk management & compliance
People
Processes
 Technology
Data assets
Business alignment
Data governance organization
Data management

10. Ovaledge Data Governance Maturity Model

Neither Gartner nor IBM models provide the detail required to overcome the data management challenges that
organizations face. The Ovaledge Data Governance Maturity Model enables organizations to track the progress of their
Data Governance initiatives.

10.1. Level 1: Unaware

Unaware of the importance of data
No action taken
Processes are reactive and generally chaotic
 10.2. Level 2: Aware
There is an awareness of the importance of data
 Existing data practices are understood and well documented
An inventory of data sources is available

10.3. Level 3: Defined

Data governance rules and policies are defined
Data owners and data stewards are identified
A governance committee is set up
A data catalog is installed

10.4. Level 4: Implemented

Data governance policies and implementing rules are enforced
There is training conducted
Data is collected and measured
Alerts are set up to monitor data quality issues raised by users
 10.5. Level 5: Optimized
Rules and policies for better efficiency are optimized
 Redundancies are reduced with redesigned workflows
Data is tagged by users to increase discoverability

The Ovaledge Data Governance Maturity Model should be applied to three core areas of Data Governance: data
quality, data access management, and data literacy. The aim is to apply this model to each of the three areas
independently and tackle Data Governance progressively.

11. Kalido Data Governance Maturity Model

Published in September 2010, the Kalido Data Governance Maturity Model is based on Magnitude’s own market
research with more than 40 companies at varying stages of maturity. Similar to the DataFlux model, it has 4 stages,
which map to the evolution of how organizations treat data assets. The model also offers a free online self-assessment
tool .

Here are the stages with their characteristics, outlined across 3 areas:

1. Organization
2. Process
 3. Technology

11.1. Level 1: Application-Centric


At this stage, some organizations attempt to govern data through enterprise data modeling, which is mostly an
academic exercise. Efforts are mostly driven by IT without the broad organizational support and authority to enforce
compliance.

Organization:

Authority and data stewardship do not exist

There is little or no collaboration between IT and the business
Business views data as IT’s responsibility

Process:

No processes in place for Data Governance

Technology:

Models of data and business processes as well as rules are entirely embedded in applications
There are no tools for modeling, managing, and ensuring data quality
There are no repositories that capture enterprise-wide, cross-functional views of data
 11.2. Level 2: Enterprise Repository-Centric
Data governance is typically siloed around individual enterprise repositories, such as a data warehouse or an
 Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system. Also, governance is informal, lacking a distinct organizational structure and
clearly defined and executed processes.

Organization:

Some authority for data exists in IT

No official recognition of data stewardship, nor defined roles and responsibilities
Inconsistent collaboration between IT and business when it comes to data

Process:

Loosely defined processes exist around enterprise repositories (ex: a data warehouse, master data hub, and large
operational systems)
Data issues are tackled reactively without addressing the root cause
No institutionalized process for making enterprise-wide, business centric decisions for data

Technology:

Data warehouses and/or master data hubs exist

 Investments in data quality and metadata tools are made around these systems
Managing data across multiple systems follow a bottom-up approach with limited influence

 11.3. Level 3: Policy-Centric

Rather than envisioning ever-larger and more encompassing repositories, organizations put processes in place for
defining, implementing and enforcing policies for data. It is acceptable for the same type of data to be stored in
multiple places as long as they adhere to the same set of policies. Enterprise repositories continue to be important, but
they’re built on governed platforms integrated with enterprise data policies.

Business takes increasing responsibility for data content, and data is widely recognized as one of the most valuable
corporate assets throughout the organization

Organization:

A cross-functional Data Governance council is formed

Data stewards have defined roles and responsibilities and are explicitly appointed
Business is engaged in managing data
Data is seen more and more as an asset

Process:
 Processes for policy definition, communication and enforcement are implemented
A clear process for reporting and tracking data issues is established: Check out our free data quality issues log
template
 Key enterprise data repositories are governed by a single, streamlined set of governance processes

Technology:

A centralized repository of data policies exists and sets policies in a top-down fashion
The process of Data Governance is supported using an automated workflow
Data quality is regularly monitored and measured

12. Level 4: Fully Governed

Over time, the scope of the Data Governance program will increase to cover all major areas of competence: model,
quality, security and lifecycle. Clearly defined and enforced policies will cover all high-value data assets, the business
processes that produce and consume them and systems that store and manipulate them.

There is a strong culture that values data as a strategic asset. Like human resource management, a distinct data
organization with institutionalized governance processes becomes a permanent business function.

Organization:
 The Data Governance organizational structure is institutionalized
Data governance is seen as business critical and has the same level of importance such as HR and Finance
Business takes full ownership for the data and data policy making

Process:

Data governance is a core business process and always taken into account
Decisions are made with quantifiable benefit/cost/risk analysis

Technology:

Business policies for data model, data quality, security, lifecycle management are integrated with user interactions
with data
Centrally defined policies and rules drive behavior of systems where possible
Data are monitored and issues are addressed proactively

13. DMM Maturity Model

The DMM Maturity Model also lays out a number of areas in which
Official Training, Individual Certifications,
an organisation is graded to present an overall level of Data
and Appraisals for the current version of
Governance development. ISACA and CMMI merged in 2016.
Between them, they have articulated the model for how data can
 best be obtained, used, kept, and deleted, which is now the gold Data Management Maturity are no longer
standard for process improvement. CMMI’s Data Management available as of 1 January 2022.
Maturity (DMM) model is:


a process improvement and capability maturity framework for the management of an organization’s data
assets and related activities. It contains best practices for establishing, building, sustaining, and optimizing
effective data management across the data lifecycle, from creation through delivery, maintenance, and
archiving. The categories consist of:

1. Data Management Strategy

2. Data Governance
3. Data Quality
4. Data Operations
5. Platform and Architecture, and
6. Supporting Processes
Each of these categories is graded on a 5-point scale starting from Level 1 (Performed), ranging to Level 5 (Optimised),
the goal of which is to internalise the understanding that data is critical for survival.

The five levels of the CMMI Data Management Maturity Model are:
 13.1. Level 1: Ad hoc
Processes are performed ad hoc, primarily at the project level. Process discipline is primarily reactive, fixing data issues
 rather than improving quality processes. Data is considered only from the project, application, or immediate work tasks
and not as a strategic resource. Data management is not a board-level initiative or topic.

13.2. Level 2: Managed

Processes are now planned and executed within policy guidelines. While there is awareness of the importance of
treating data as a critical asset, the skills or tools are still inadequate from an organizational perspective. Senior
leadership has begun to take data management seriously and is guided by assessments from consultants or industry
standards.

13.3. Level 3: Defined

Defined sets of standard processes are now helping to provide a consistent quality of data to help perform business
tasks, meet strategic visions or maintain regulatory compliance. Management and governance oversight has been
introduced along with monitoring, alerting and feedback loops. Data inconsistencies have the resources, tools, and
funding to be addressed for critical datasets.
 13.4. Level 4: Measured
Process metrics are judged against agreed variances. Data is treated as a source of competitive advantage or as an
 asset in performing daily tasks. Everyone is using data as a source of information and is concerned about its accuracy
and timeliness to perform their work safely and securely. Applications are written to capture data issues that are
resolved as quickly as possible to avoid reputational damage or regulatory fines.

13.5. Level 5: Optimized

Process performance is continually improved through incremental and innovative improvements driven by feedback
obtained via automated tools, peers, industry practices, competitors, and customers. Data is regarded as the critical
asset, other than skilled resources, for survival in a volatile economy.

14. DAMA
Published by DAMA International in 2009, the DAMA Guide to the Data Management Body of Knowledge (DMBOK)
provides a comprehensive overview of the Data Management across nine key practice areas (KPA) in data
management:

Data Governance
 Data Development
Database Operations Management
Data Security Management
 Reference & Master Data Management
Data Warehousing & Business Intelligence Management
Document & Content Management
Metadata Management
Data Quality Management
Data Architecture Management

The DAMA DMBOK was not written for the purpose of implementing it into a capability maturity framework for the
assessment of an organization’s Data Governance and Data Management abilities. However, it enumerates best
practices for the entire field of Data Management, so it lends itself well as a framework and methodology for Data
Governance Maturity assessments.

15. DCAM
Developed by EDM Council , DCAM™ – the Data Management Capability Assessment Model – is an industry
standard framework for Data Management. DCAM defines the scope of capabilities required to establish, enable and
sustain a mature Data Management discipline. It addresses the strategies, organizational structures, technology and
 operational best practices needed to successfully drive Data Management across organizations, and ensures that data
can support digital transformation, advanced analytics such as AI and ML, and data ethics.


16. ARMA International
The ARMA International model is based on the Generally Accepted Recordkeeping Principles: Accountability,
Transparency, Integrity, Protection, Compliance, Availability, Retention and Disposition. An organisation is graded on
each of these levels on a scale of competency starting with Level 1 (Substandard) which represents a baseline, to Level
5 (Transformational) which represents a data environment in which good governance is so integrated as to be routine.

Summary 

Data Governance Maturity Models help organizations assess their Data Governance capabilities, educate their
employees, identify gaps and compare their progress against industry peers. Such assessments provide objective
and auditable evidence to peers and market authorities on the adoption of Data Management best practices. By
aligning the data programs with industry best practices, a firm can establish a benchmark from which to develop
and grow your program. A maturity model creates the opportunity for organizational data programs to align and
demonstrate to the sponsors, the business stakeholders, the senior executives, and the oversight authorities as
well as regulators that they are adhering to an industry best practice critical to building, sustaining and leveraging
 their data. By using the benchmark, the same can be mapped to existing regulations like BCBS, GDPR to build or
improve on these capabilities.


APA MLA Harvard Vancouver Chicago IEEE

Think Insights (January 2, 2025) Data Governance Maturity Model. Retrieved from
https://thinkinsights.net/data/data-governance-maturity-model/.

References
1 The Data Governance Maturity Model: Establishing the People, Policies and Technology That Manage Enterprise
Data

By Mithun A. Sridharan | 21. May 2022 | Data | Data, Digital, Governance, Methodologies, Models | 18 minutes

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!        

 ABOUT THE AUTHOR: MITHUN A. SRIDHARAN

I am Mithun A. Sridharan, TEDx speaker , Founder and Managing Director at Think Insights, Board
Member at Forbes Technology Council , Managing Partner at INTRVU , Director at Publicis Sapient

, and Chapter Director at Startup Grind . I advise CxOs & Executives at global corporations on
their strategic business and technology transformation portfolios. Previously, I served on leadership
and executive roles at global Management Consulting & technology firms, such as KPMG, Sapient
Consulting, Oracle, and EADS. My insights on this website are based on my 1st-hand client
engagement experiences across Capital Markets, Automotive and Hi-tech verticals. I also serve as an
Area Director at Toastmasters International and am a hobby golfer. I am based in Heidelberg,
Germany. Please feel free connect with me on LinkedIn .

RELATED POSTS


FAIR Data Principles Data Fabric Transactional Dat

23. June 2022 14. June 2022 11. June 2022

MADE WITH ♡ IN GERMANY

(+49) 176 9792 4897
[email protected]

DMCA GDPR IMPRINT PRIVACY POLICY TERMS OF SERVICE TERMS OF USE PARTNERS CONTACT US ARTICLES INDEX WRITING GUIDELINES

© COPYRIGHT 2015 - 2025 | ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

      