MDM Workshop 02-Case Studies & Business Benefits (לקריאה בלבד) (מצב תאימות)

DataDelta Master Data Management (MDM) Workshop
Session 2:
MDM Case Studies & Business Benefits
Aaron Zornes Ed Allburn

Chief Research Officer President & CEO
The MDM Institute DataDelta, Inc.
aaron.zornes@tcdii.com allburn@datadelta.com
DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 1

Build vs Buy
• Data structures & business Value of Integration

Exceeds Value of Build/Buy
processes mustt be
b supremelyl
flexible ETL EAI MDI
• Underlying IT infrastructure Value

V l off
Value
must enable new business Integrating
Applications
models
• Policies/process flows must Value of
Building
integrate in ways previously Applications
problematic Monolithic Client/Server SOA/
Time
Apps Apps Web Services
EAI = enterprise application integration

ETL = extract-transform-load
MDI = master data integration
SOA = service-oriented architecture
Global competition mandates

a wide variety of new business styles
Business Drivers 2008-09
• Just-in-time 21st century business

models
d l mandate
d t b both
th agility
ilit & Agile Enterprise
integration across enterprise to
– Provide higher profitability
Self-Directed
– Reduce operations costs
Service
– Increase accuracy of regulatory
compliance M&A Integrated
“Ready” Risk
• Emergence of “demand chains”
Mgmt
mandates synergetic approach across
both “party”
party & “product”
product master systems Co-opetition
Co opetition Rapid
via common business services NPI
“Demand”
• M&A as a business strategy Chains
Contemporary business strategies mandate flexible

infrastructure –propelling MDM into “Top 10” initiative
‘Top 5’ Justifications for MDM Initiatives
1. Catalyzes market leadership & dominance

2. Provides increased ROI by “leveraging / rationalizing existing
infrastructure”
3. Significantly increases shareholder value
4. Provides a disruptive technology for new business models
5. Enables compliance & regulatory reporting

MDM Catalyzes Market Leadership & Dominance
• Maximizes walletshare across product lines & BUs

– Upsell via sticky bundles
– New markets via cross sell to existing customer base
• Increases understanding of large customers by grouping all buying
orgs into B2B or B2C hierarchy
• Enables integrated customer analytics – i.e., profitability analysis,
lifetime value
• Enables “co-opetition” & electronic storefront models – e.g., B2B2C by
integrating partner data with internal data
• Protects brand integrity by increasing customer satisfaction due to
more focused marketing & service campaigns – e.g., “blended agent”
capability
bilit
• Actualizes “consistent customer treatment” by blending channels to
deliver common customer experiences
p

MDM Provides Increased ROI by “Leveraging
Existing Infrastructure
Infrastructure”
• Enables integration of new & old channels – e.g., collections,
f d contact
fraud, t t centers
t with
ith ki
kiosk,k ATM
ATM, IVR & online
li self-service
lf i
• Minimizes architectural complexity to simplify application
solution design,
g , deployment,
p y , & maintenance
• Reduces number of interfaces between applications &
increasing reuse factor to save substantial integration costs
• I
Improves infrastructure
i f t t flexibility
fl ibilit andd control
t l to
t enhance
h overallll
system performance
• Accelerates ROI of enterprise
p CRM solutions
• Reduces overall project risk through increased flexibility &
centrally managed architecture

MDM Significantly Increases Shareholder Value
• Drives costs of “dirty data” out of the info supply chain

• Accelerates revenue growth via more intelligent cross-sell & up-sell
enabled by complete understanding of customer (profile, accounts
& interactions) to leverage bundling opportunities
• Facilitates quick scales of economy in mergers & acquisitions
(M&A) – e.g., shortening customer, desktop, & billing integration
timeframes
f while providing scalability to support rapid assimilation
of new block of customers
• Measures,, manages g & grows
g “customer information” as a key y
corporate asset
• Drives fundamental operational savings & efficiencies – e.g., “once
& done
done” enterprise-wide
enterprise wide services for key customer processes such
as account changes (name, address)

MDM Provides a Disruptive Technology for
New Business Models
• Enables self-directed customer experience for sales & service
• P i i
Provisions h
hyper-integrated
i t t d 21st
21 t century
t supply
l chain
h i – e.g.,
outsourced manufacturing, outsourced service (“he who owns master
reference data, dominates supply chain”)
• Automates customer transactions that flow across systems
• Enables contingency planning for future technologies – e.g.,
biometrics smartcards,
biometrics, smartcards etc.
etc
• Provides much more than “just another customer interface”
– 21st century business application development platform
– Service-oriented architecture – a.k.a, “first foray into SOA”
– Web services
– Integrated analytics
– Near real-time materialization

MDM Enables Compliance & Regulatory Reporting
• Centrally manages privacy preferences for consistent rules of visibility &

entitlements
titl t
• Enhances “evergreening” of customer data accuracy – e.g., continuous
customer data improvement
p by
ypproviding
g self-directed customer care
portals … which in turn integrate customer info across business units
• Enables regulatory reporting compliance– i.e., large customers’ material
events (SOX
(SOX, BASEL II)
• Facilitates compliance with AML, OFAC, USA PATRIOT, et al

Industry-Specific MDM Requirements
• Financial services providers (FSPs)

• Communications services providers (CSPs)
• Life sciences / pharmaceutical
• Government
• Healthcare
• High-technology manufacturing (t.b.d)
• Manufacturing (discrete, process)
• Retail (t.b.d)
• Hospitality (t.b.d)
Early adopters of MDM solutions include: FSPs, CSPs, Pharma &

High-Tech Manufacturing
Why Market-Leading FSPs Adopt MDM
• Optimize customer profitability

• Increase operational efficiencies
• Enhance regulatory compliance
• Improve
p overall BI
• Deliver ROI on CRM initiatives
• Provide “infrastructure
rationalization”
ti li ti ”
• Facilitate growth-by-M&A
FSPs must transform from customer-hostile,, batch

business model to give customers actionable 360º
view in “near real time”
Banking MDM Requirements
Business Drivers Technology Challenges
9 Facilitate growth-by-M&A 9 Increasingly complex business
models (B2B2C) as “electronic
9 Comply with privacy mandates storefronts”
9 Improve compliance – e.g., AML, BXA, CIP 9 Demand for “near real-time”
326, OFAC, SOX, …
data lineage
9 Increase sales productivity by 9 Rationalizing complex &
modeling corporate hierarchies & dynamic business & individual
structures of B2B customers hierarchies
9 Improve real-time portfolio view for 9 Hacker-proof customer data
both wealth management & internal protection
risk management
g g
9 High-RAS (reliability,
y availability,
y
scalability) nature of mission-
9 Increase customer satisfaction
critical infrastructure
(retention/upsell) by streamlining routine
customer
cus o e maintenance
a e a ce
BXA - Bureau of Export Administration
9 Reduce IT infrastructure costs CIP 326 – Customer ID Program of USA PATRIOT Act
OFAC - Office of Foreign Assets Control
Customer view must prevail over product view as higher margin

customers dictate common set of products & services via rapid
adoption of MDM
Retail Banking – Business Objectives
• Provide single view of customer

– Across all channels
– Across all products
• Reduce operational costs
• Improve cross-selling
• Improve net credit loss
• Increase marketing lift
• Manage privacy centrally
• Provide operational view for Basel II compliance
• Provide improved customer service
• St
Streamline
li accountt opening
i process

Retail Banking – Technical Requirements
• Proven performance & scalability

• Service-oriented architecture
• Ability to handle complex hierarchies
• Ability to integrate to existing infrastructure
• Open architecture – J2EE compliant
• Proven functionality y for services layer
y
• Existing CIF co-existence & eventual replacement strategy

Retail Banking – Key Drivers
• Improve cross
cross-selling
selling & campaign lift
– “Operationalize” marketing data
– Leverage service interactions into sales opportunities by following
up on current campaigns
• Regulatory compliance
– Providing operational view of customer into existing data
warehouse for Basel II compliance
– Abilityy to store p
privacy
yppreferences at a true enterprise
p level

Banking MDM Scorecard:
“Top
Top 5
5” Business Drivers & Technology Challenges

Credit Card Issuer MDM Requirements
9 Aggregation within industry – 9 Integration of new & old channels –
exacerbated by big commercial banks e.g.,
e g collections
collections, fraud
fraud, contact centers with
kiosk, ATM, IVR & online self-service
emulating major monolines
9 Contingency planning for future
9 Heavy reliance upon direct mail
technologies – e.g., biometrics,
marketing – & inherent increased smartcards, etc.
fraud risk 9 Complex hierarchy mgmt – e.g.,
9 Improve compliance – e.g., AML, BXA, CIP household-level risk mgmt
326 OFAC,
326, OFAC SOX
SOX, … 9 Scalability – e.g,
e g ability to integrate new
block of customers
9 Support future business objectives –
e.g., M&A 9 Infrastructure costs of integrating
new data sources & channels
9 Ensure consistent customer service
across all channels
9 Private label cards needing lifestyle
event based differentiation
event-based
9 Reduce IT infrastructure costs
Challenge is to move
mo e to portfolio-level
po tfolio le el integ
integration
ation despite the
politics & technology inertia
Credit Card Issuer MDM Scorecard:
“Top
Top 55” Business Drivers & Technology Challenges

Insurance MDM Requirements
9 Facilitate growth-by-M&A 9 Expand use of incumbent
application systems (e.g., CRM)
9 Comply with privacy mandates via enterprise customer identity
9 Increase deep understanding of service (universal key) across
data q
qualityy & reliability
y issues all applications
pp
related to claims & fraud 9 Increase flexibility to add new
9 Embrace frequent regulation & de- channels, data sources, touch
points, etc. via SOA
regulation cycles – e.g., HIPAA, NPI
9 High-RAS (reliability, availability,
9 Accommodate growing technical scalability) nature of mission-
patchwork of proposed legislation – critical infrastructure
e.g.,
g , NHIN
9 Hacker-proof
Hacker proof ccustomer
stomer data
9 Reduce IT infrastructure costs protection
HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act

NHIN - National Health Identification Number
NPI - National Provider Identifier
Ins e s need to mo
Insurers move e to “high to
touch”
ch” se
service
ice model wherein
he ein
near real-time channel integration is critical
Insurance MDM Scorecard:
“Top
Top 5
5” Business Drivers & Technology Challenges

Top 5 Vendors’ Mindshare within Financial Svcs
CDI Institute MarketPulse™ Survey
347 Global 2000 IT Organizations (November 2004)
DWL Customer
85% Siebel Universal Customer Master

ndor Mindshare
ces
82%
ncial Servic
IBM Client Information Integration

Solution
45%
1
Sanchez CRM
CDI Ven
Finan
3%
2% ISI Synchronous
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
% Responses
Communications Services Provider Requirements

9 Consolidation (M&A) 9 Ability tto bl
Abilit blend
d channels
h l
9 Deregulation/re-regulation 9 Complex supply chains
9 Increasingly "portable" customers
9 Self-directed service to drive down 9 Onerous regulatory mandates
customer care costs 9 Extreme scalability in call centers,
9 Real-time marketing & integrated provisioning, etc.
campaign management using 9 Flood of data due to ‘data
data
predictive
di ti analytics
l ti
9 Fraud detection services’
9 Bill presentation 9 “Plan anywhere, build anywhere”
investment strategies in new
technologies that enable quicker
new product introduction (NPI) at
lower cost without sacrificing
quality
Telco evolution will be radical as intense competition in wireless, LD,
Internet & local service commoditizes products & slashes profits –
Internet,
not to mention VoIP
Top 5 CDI Vendors’ Mindshare within Telco
DWL Customer
16%
dshare
Oracle Customer Data Hub

communicattions
15%
endor Mind
Initiate Systems Identity Hub

5%
1
Siebel Universal Customer Master

CDI Ve
3%
Telec
2% Ascential Enterprise Integration Suite
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
% Responses

Survey Overview: “ROI Strategies for CSP’s M&A”
• 10+ North American CSPs – e.g., cable Tactical ROI

carriers moving into telephony,
telephony CLECs
CLECs, • Saving substantial integration costs
ILECs, LD carriers, wireless, & • Improving flexibility & control to enhance
conglomerates overall system performance
– 100% with > 1M subscribers • Accelerating time-to-market of CRM, SCM, &

PIM solutions
– 50% > 5M subscribers
• Reducing overall project risk
• >75% are investing in CDI in support of
stated corporate target to reduce “level
Strategic ROI
of infrastructure investment” with 49%
• Understanding & predicting customers’
stating CDI to be either important or behaviors
critical to this outcome • Identifying
Id tif i & deflecting
d fl ti competitors’
tit ’ moves
• 30% had COTS software for CDI • Integrating supply chains with key business
installed with the remainder actively partners
evaluating an enterprise-wide solution • Forecasting & acting on new opportunities as
a “first mover”
COTS = commercial, off-the-shelf software
M&A demands comprehensive & integrated profiles

CDI MarketPulse™ Findings: “Corporate Issues”
How do you RANK your company's DESIRED STRATEGIC RESULTS resulting from M&A?
Corporate alignment
61%
Increase customer satisfaction and retention
75%
Increased operational efficiencies
1 75% Increased profitability
92% M k dominance
Market d i
100%
Source: MDM Institute 1H2005 MarketPulse™ Survey
of 12 North American CSP’s IT Organizations
g
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
% Responses
For strategic M&A, “Market dominance” cited twice as often as next highest
ranked “Increased pprofitability”,
y , “Increased operational
p efficiencies” &
“Corporate alignment”

CDI MarketPulse™ Findings: “Marketing Issues”
How do you RANK your company's DESIRED “MARKETING” OUTCOMES resulting from M&A?
Enable product bundling

71%
Expedite time to mkt of new products
63%
Systematize analytics to enable LTV mktg
1 57% Evolve to R/T mktg campaign mgmt
Enable solution selling

43%
18%
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
% Responses
“Enable product bundling” 50% more important as

“Systematize analytics to determine customer, segment,
bundle,, & pproduct line p
profitability”
y –y
yet 60% expect
p CDI
solution to integrate with BI or enterprise DW during first year
CDI MarketPulse™ Findings: “Technology Issues”
How do you RANK your company's MAJOR TECHNOLOGY CHALLENGES resulting from M&A?
Legacy app ingtegration (CRIS, LEIS, LEIM,

USOCs)
83%
Business process/workflow integration
50% D t b
Database/data
/d t model
d l iintegration
t ti
Scalability
42%
1
SOA for business services infrastructure
17%
15%

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
% Responses
“Legacy application integration (CRIS, LEIS, LEIM, USOCs)” rated

at least 33% more important than “Business process/workflow
integration” & “Database/data model integration”

CDI MarketPulse™ Survey Findings
• CSPs must acknowledge state-of-IT-affairs resulting from continuous

M&A
• CDI provides proven means to insure ROI of M&A – especially in CSP
industry with historically fragmented customer & product master DBs
• Market leading CSPs are planning to apply CDI as disruptive
Market-leading
technology to “outmarket & outservice the competition”
• “Build vs. buy” has become “buy mega vendor” vs. “buy best of breed”
as ITOs
ITO are mandated
d t d to
t move away fromf home-grown
h CDI solutions
l ti
to COTS solution
• During 2005-06, CSPs will focus on deploying data-centric CDI
i f
infrastructure to provide
id unified
ifi d customer view
i across multiple
li l
channels & LOBs
• During 2006-08, CSPs will move to process-centric CDI infrastructure
to deliver increasingly accurate, complex & just-in-time unified
customer views to enable bundle mktg & self-directed customer care
CSP evolution will be radical as intense competition in wireless, LD,
Internet, & local service commoditizes products & slashes profits –
not to mention VoIP
Pharma/Life Sciences Business Imperatives
• Improve productivity of pharma sales 360° View of Customer

reps
• Coordinate sales & operations Primary Care
Physicians
planning via common infrastructure &
goals/metrics Contracte Specialty
d Physicians
• Increase customer/physician Accounts
acquisition, retention & profitability Health

• R d
Reduce iinfo
f managementt Care
Professional
overload/costs Group
Pharmacy
Directors &
Purchasin
• Prepare for uncertain future g Orgs
Other
Influencers
Wholesalers /
Speciality
Distributors
Recent survey indicates physicians need info to make more informed

buying decisions – but only about 1/3 consider pharma sales reps
impt sources; 1/3 found sales visits helpful, addt’l 1/3 want more
currentt comparative
ti or clinical
li i l data/analyses
d t / l relevant
l t to
t practices,
ti
plus objective info on usage & side effects
Life Sciences / Pharma Technology Challenges
9 CRM alone is not enough

9 DW+CRM is not enough
9 Importance of flexible workflow
9 Dis-intermediated data sources
9 Data service providers (IMS, NDC, AMA - cleansing, matching issues)
9 Industryy standard identifiers ((IMS,, DEA,, state licensing)
g) not always
y accurate
9 Where does content mgmt system end & where does the
structured data mgmt start?
Market-leading Pharmas must unify physician/customer information

f
from multiple
l i l systems & b business
i units
i ini a robust
b data
d model
d l
specific to pharmaceutical industry
Improve Productivity of Pharma Sales Reps
• Enable sales reps to improve sales effectiveness by leveraging

client sales histories & profile info from diverse sources
• Automatically capture physician info during sales meetings
• Spend
p more time in the field – serving gp
physicians
y – rather than in
the office recording & analyzing meeting results
• Enable physicians to make more informed purchasing decisions by
offering customized product info
info, evidence gathered thru clinical
research, & comparative analyses of medicines
• Ensure more effective territory mgmt to yield more successfully
market & sell products thru efficient call handling & better cross-
channel communication & coordination
Making sales reps more productive, requires a complete picture of

the physician profile, mktg activities, etc. – database
database-centric
centric quasi
batch CDI is first step
Coordinate Sales & Operations Planning Via
Common Infrastructure & Metrics
• Monitor real-time performance of sales force to quickly make
strategic & tactical adjustments necessary to meet sales goals &
provide
id adequate
d t product
d t iinventory
t
• Employ RFID technology & the EPC Network to improve info
mgmt in pharma supply chain
• Make M&A work via vital agglomeration of customer & supplier
master data
• Integrate IT infrastructure of diverse acquisitions
• Leverage info,
info insights & relationships to expedite & enhance
product intro & adoption
• Overcome cultural obstacles to creating better collaboration
between Clinical & Marketing organizations
• Insure supply chain integrity protection for producer & patient (&
everyone in between)
• Protect the pharma enterprise involved in ever more
complicated contracts with external partners
CDI needed that not only provides excellent support for sales reps,
but also makes customer info available to marketing, R&D & supply
chain functions
Increase Customer/Physician Acquisition, Retention
& Profitability via Closed Loop Marketing
• Enable creation of segment-specific drug detailing aids
• Deliver custom detailing to physicians thru field sales channel
• Collect responses to product messages at point of customer interaction
• Analyze responses to further refine marketing campaigns based on
real-time feedback
• Design & manage sophisticated campaigns, incl medical events &
mailings
Closed-loop marketing capabilities align mktg & sales business

processes,, enabling
p g companies
p to target
g & segment
g customers,,
design & execute mktg campaigns, & analyze customers' responses
to product messages
Reduce Information Mgmt Overload/Costs
Pharma Info Overload

• Manage
a age eexploding
p od g aamount
ou o of da
data
a
produced in every part of pharma
enterprise
– CAPA, RFID & ECM data
Data Protection Supply Chain & Mfg
– 21 CFR Part 11
& Privacy Initiatives: Data: CAPA, RFID,
– HIPAA 21 CFR Part 11 & HIPAA & ECM
• Share & store discovery & development
Very Large
data in environment with onerous legal
requirements for data retention & mgmt Data Base(s)
• Generate structured analysis out of
unstructured content
Clinical &
• Manage outsourced clinical trials Marketing
– Complexity
p y is that some tasks but not all Data
are outsourced for given trial
Both physician & consumer data are intricately related as part of

information asset programs which must keep regulatory risk &
validation costs to a minimum
Prepare for Uncertain Future
• Leverage digital packaging (RFID, ECM) for compliance monitoring & supply chain
optimi ation
optimization
• Optimize consumer self-service
– Apply advanced technologies to expedite info sharing via guided search, co-browsing,
etc.
t
• Helps consumers benefit from full range of info about health issue they’re researching
• Enables pharma to deliver targeted info to customers at precise moment needed or requested
– Examples: medical education; disease mgmt; patient compliance; product awareness
• Drive & manage regulatory compliance across diverse legal domains
• Prepare for increased outsourcing of both commoditized & specialized functions
• Exploit strategic opportunities created by bioinformatics/ nanotechnology
• Leverage re-importation trends
CDI growth + Pharma growth = CDI 2

Legacy Pharma “Info Supply Chain”
SAP Sales
AMA SMG flow
Some sources Contracting Targets
to ODS & DW
DEA
STL
ODS CARS
Some sourcesOSPare
not integrated
IMS
Events
Siebel
Call
Center Web
DW
Some sources flow Dendrite
straight to the DW
Wh l
Wholesaler
l F d Govt
Fed G t
ODS = operational data store Front Office

DW = data warehouse
CARS = xxxx “Treading water …” Back Office
External Source
Contemporary Pharma “Info Supply Chain”
HIN
SAP Sales
AMA SMG
Contracting
g Targets
g
DEA
STL CARS
CDI
Registry/ OSP
IMS Hub
Siebel Events
All *reference* data

flows through CDI Registry/Hub Active Call Ctr Web
Data
Warehouse Dendrite
Wholesaler Fed Govt
Front Office
“Future-proofed …” Back Office
External Source
Top 5 Mindshare within LifeSci/Pharma
Siperian Master Reference Manager

65%
nces
ndor Mindshare
Siebel Universal Customer Master

43%
Pharma / Life-Scien
18% Dendrite Nucleus

1
CDI Ven
5% Ascential Enterprise Integration Suite
3% IBM DB2 Information Integrator
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
% Responses
Government MDM Requirements
• Self-service to drive down customer service

costs Integrated
• Integration of transactional, unstructured, Analytics
geospatial, &
demographic data to optimize public services
(& national security)
• Imperative placed on most Public Private
government agencies to collaborate Data Data
CDI
& share info
• Newly-created enhanced knowledge
repositories, tools, & processes
critically needed for meeting new
public policy requirements
• Need to positively ID & track individuals
Derivative
across languages
g g & cultures Data
Government entities must apply citizen data integration best

practices from private industry – while using extreme caution
concerning privacy & security
Mission-Critical Citizen Data Integration (CDI)
• Key technologies • Key vendors

– Anonymous entity resolution – Initiate
I iti t Systems
S t
(name classifier & hunter)
– Language Analysis Systems
– Business intelligence (perpetual
analytics) – MetaMatrix
– Dynamic scoring – Salford Systems
– Link analysis (° of separation) – SAS
– Grid scalability – SPSS
– Data mining – Superstructure
– Text mining – Systems
S t Research
R h&
– Real-time report streaming Development
– Voice/text analysis – The Distillery
y
Additional challenges for gov’t include: scalability (scale, # &

h
heterogeneity
i off DBs),
) ““very llarge scale”
l ” turff b
battles,
l llack
k off
national ID in US, supra-politics
Regulatory Juggernaut & U.S. Initiatives
• Klinger-Cohen Act • In-Q-Tel venture capital fund

• Offi off Foreign
Office F i Assets
A t • Di it l collection
Digital ll ti system t
Control (OFAC) 1000 (FBI's “Carnivore”)
• Bureau of Export
p • CAPWIN p project
j for the
Administration (BXA) lists of metro District of Columbia
sanctioned governments, region emergency response
organizations individuals
organizations, system
• USA PATRIOT Act • Terrorist Threat Integration
Center
During 2004-05, government will be stressed to analyze citizens’

behaviors to support national security initiatives – & will increasingly
t
turn tto commercial
i l IT sector
t for
f “outside
“ t id theth box”
b ” thinking
thi ki & best
b t
practices
Top 5 CDI Vendor’s Mindshare within Public Sector
Initiate Systems Identity Hub

6%
ndor Mindshare
Ascential Enterprise Integration Suite

5%
blic Sector
4% Siebel Universal Customer Master

1
Pub
CDI Ven
3% MetaMatrix Server
1% ObjectStar Enterprise CDI
0% 1% 2% 3% 4% 5% 6%
% Responses
Why are Healthcare Providers/Payers Adopting CDI?
• Optimize customer profitability “Most other economic

sectors
t have
h usedd IT to
t
• Increase operational efficiencies become integrated &
• Enhance regulatory compliance more efficient.
• Improve overall BI H lth
Healthcare, ttoo, can b
be
• Deliver ROI on CRM initiatives transformed.”
Leonard D. Schaeffer,
• Provide “infrastructure
infrastructure rationalization”
rationalization Chairman & CEO
• Facilitate growth-by-M&A WellPoint Health Networks
Keynote Address at 2004
Health Information
Technology Summit
Clearly, healthcare payers don’t know enough about their

“customers” — physicians, members, & employers – i.e., healthcare
payers h
have nott b
been pushed
h d on customer
t service
i issues
i because
b
they historically were near-monopoly in their geographies
Healthcare Payer/Provider CDI Requirements
9 Ongoing consolidation straining capacity of 9 Need to react intelligently &
b t h
batch-centric
t i processes instantly to changing “customer”
9 Corporate boards & investors reluctant to information such as claims
provide capital for major up-front processing & medical mgmt
investments 9 Requirement for deep
9 Frequent regulation & de-regulation cycles understanding of data quality &
– e.g., HIPAA & NPI, NHIN reliability issues as it relates to
eligibility, claims, & fraud
9 Shorter economic ”product”
product lifecycles – e.g.,
eg
FSAs 9 Necessity for a enterprise data
model across disparate sources &
9 Increased competition -- e.g., offshore Rx applications to support complexity
fulfillment, NFPs becoming g “for profit” of healthcare business model
9 Morphing member base demographics –
aging “baby boomer bubble”, “Gen X”, etc.
9 Ever increasing QoS expectations HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability
y & Accountability
y Act
NPI – national provider identifier
NHIN - national health identification number
Healthcare master customer data must be the most accurate, up-to-

the-minute
the minute source of customer information & must feed downstream
systems (e.g., claims processing) as well as external vendors.
Healthcare Payer/Provider CDI Scorecard:
“Top
Top 3
3” Business Drivers
12 Healthcare Payer IT Organizations (January 2005)
Increase customer satisfaction and

retention
75%
Business Drivers
Increase profitability
92% Create operational efficiencies

1
CDI B
100%
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
%R
Responses

Healthcare Payer/Provider CDI Scorecard:
“Top
Top 3
3” Technology Challenges
12 Healthcare Payer IT Organizations (January 2005)
Increase flexibility to add new

processes via service-oriented
hallenges
92% architecture
Integrate with legacy applications and

databases
chnology Ch
100%
Provide extreme scalability in data
1
volumes
CDI Tec
100%
88% 90% 92% 94% 96% 98% 100%
% Responses

Case Studies, Challenges
g & Lessons Learned
Book interviews - early findings & emerging trends:
• Cross-section of interviews from our forthcoming book
• F
Focus on in-the-trenches,
i th t h hands-on
h d project
j t execution
ti
• Avoided traditional
traditional, academic case study interviews
• Asked “What kinds of surprises & challenges did you face, and
how did you overcome them?”

Book Interviews: Surprises & Challenges
g
Asked “What
What kinds of surprises & challenges did you face, and how did
you overcome them?” – in areas such as:
• People: Execs, co-workers, vendors, consultants, analysts
• Process: Data Stewardship & Data Governance

Governance, cooperation
cooperation, dispute
resolution
• Technology: Vendor selection, implementation, integration
• Data: Sources (internal & external

external, augmentation & referential)
referential), ETL
ETL,
Data Quality, Match & Merge logic, etc.

Book Interviews – Other Topics
Other general topics:

• Project goals & Key Results/highlights
• Who uses/depends on the results where & how?
• When was value delivered & how was it measured?
• Single "Big Bang" project or multi-stage phased implementation?
• Business
B i C
Case & E Executive
ti S Sponsors
• Project Ownership, Management & outside assistance
• Solution Description (people, process, technology & data)
• Surprises & Lessons Learned

Book Interviews - Responses
• People focused on topics of greatest interest to them
• Generally a 1-hour phone call
• Call for more interview volunteers!

– Any project stage
– Short 1-hour
1 hour call
– Can be anonymous

Interviews: Earlyy Findings
g & Emerging
g g Trends
This presentation focuses on a subset of key

Challenges, Surprises and Lessons Learned in:
• Business Case
• Data Quality
• Data Governance
• Other Major Surprises & Lessons Learned

Earlyy Findings
g & Trends: Business Case
• SIs & consultants can add strong value even at this initial stage by
enhancing structure & credibility
• Phase Implementations” are proving easier to win funding and

“Phase
successfully execute
• CDI-MDM now being so widely identified as a critical strategic

business objective that some business cases are coming from,
instead of being sold to
to, Sr Mgmt (e
(e.g.
g “Why
Why aren
aren’tt we doing this
yet?”)
• But mid-level mgmt sometime using business case to avoid

support (“I need a business case justification before I can change
myy priorities”)
p )

Earlyy Findings
g & Trends: Data Quality
y
• You are guaranteed to find new problems & issues, despite

past investments in data quality
• Extensive data profiling

profiling, early
early, is essential
• Trust,
ust, but verify,
e y, “trusted”
t usted tthird-party
d pa ty data sou
sources
ces
– Extensive data profiling is again warranted
– Ensure vendor’s definitions map to your definitions
• “Total employees” – by subsidiary or total hierarchy?
• “Total revenue” – by subsidiary or total hierarchy?
• “Match Accuracy” is different, but highly dependent upon, data

quality

Earlyy Findings
g & Trends: Data Governance
• Sometimes success can occur without a formal Data Governance

program & full-time Data Stewards
• But in general,
general the more complex the environment (# data siloes
siloes,
# LOB users) the more important to have formal Data Goverance
to resolve conflicts
• Data Governance requires data domain experts (business users)

who are a scarce resouce and thus guaranteed to have frequent
priority conflicts
• Strong value being reported from metadata tools (as opposed to

“just using Excel to define & map fields”)

Earlyy Findings
g & Trends: Surprises
• Internal Education & Project PR

– Not just during business case, but ongoing recruitment
– Not just for initial collaboration recruitment, but also to help maintain
positive momentum & excitement around project
– Not just internal use, but recruited by Aaron Zornes for future CDI-
MDM Summit (leverage that work for more value)
– Leverage CDI-MDM
CDI MDM Summit material for own ppt
• Sophisticated
p metadata management
g
– More than just “mapping fields in Excel”
– More than just a “web wrapper around Access”
– More Sr Mgmt is more often recognizing the value of modern
modern,
sophisticated metadata tools in the business case

Case Study:
y
Case Study:
A Major International Financial Institution

Business Case
Background
• 2006 started CDI project with $7M budget
• 32 global customer data sources
• Encouraging results half-way through
• Realized opportunity to address other problems
• Decided
D id d tto “t
“take
k thi
this tto the
th nextt llevel”
l”
• Use full data governance and full data management
• Opportunity to save lots more money

Business Case
Business case:
• Analyzed all 2007/08 data projects
• Determined cost of siloed approach of $22M
• Estimated could deliver for $14M over 2 years via CDI-MDM
• 1 “data champion” developed case in just 2 months
– Full
Full-time
time time job
– get the numbers, crunch them, validate them, get rates from vendors, create
ppts, etc.
– Had to press for numbers – used sponsor name for meeting leverage “X will
be facilitating the meeting for CIO…”
– Some people would panic at thought of their local data silo eventually going
away

Data Qualityy
“Oh
Oh God, let me give you an example of the kinds of things we were
finding:”
One of the groups only had a 40% 30% complete address

• When asked, response was “when missing, we use our HQ address”
• Controller response “Are
Are you out of your mind? We can’t
can t calculate our
taxes and we’ll be fined!”
“So the process they were doing locally could have caused a major
impact to the tax group and nobody knew about it and the dollar
amount put on top of that could have been huge in fines.”
fines.

Data Governance
Created a full “Data Management Program Guide”:

• mission statement, guiding principles, goals, all the different business
drivers, etc.
• bible for moving the program forward
• included all the key processes:
– how we gget data
– how manage source system analysis
– data quality issues
– Escalation
– data definition via council meetings
• All documented in full detail
– Make it very easy for people to clearly understand roles and
responsibilities of who’s doing what and when

Data Governance
Full escalation process established to address conflicts:

• “My business doesn’t operate that way, that’s not the way I report my
numbers to my boss” – Local Business
• “This
This is the way it’s supposed to be
be, that’s the way we report our
numbers to the street” – Enterprise
Steering committee
• One of the first things done
• Defined
D fi d the
h organization
i i as one off the
h fi
first kkey goals
l
• Started meeting even before program 100% formalized
• Established full escalation hierarchy

Data Governance
Data Governance Hierarchy

• Steering Committee (8 people, monthly) - program decision rights
makers around funding, prioritization, staff and escalation issues
• Data Governance Council: reps from legal
legal, tax
tax, credit
credit, finance
finance, audit
audit,
stocks, etc. (6 people, on demand) - data decision rights group that is
purely making decisions on data, data policies, etc
• Subcommittee - a representative of the council yet at a lower
level…someone who has more hands on experience with certain
issues based on the subject
j of the day
y
• Data Management Team
– Business “data champion”
– IT manager
– Project managers, data stewards, data warehouse architects, ETL

Surprises & Lessons Learned
• Early success with initial customer hub project was critical

“Wasn’t just about creating a customer hub because anybody can buy a
product and load data”
• Value in understanding:
– how good or how bad the data was
– how good or how bad the processes were around that data,
– how inconsistent people within different groups and different systems treat
customer data
• True top down type governance – exec sponsor(s) making sure that
peoplel understand
d t d th they’re
’ committed itt d
“We couldn’t do this from the bottom up, it would never work. There are too
many people in the organization over the last couple of years where the
culture has been:
‘I am a local business unit. I can dictate the way I run my business’”
• Time was main concern (needed people dedicated full-time)

– Key subject matter experts (understand & define financial terms, definitions
& calculations) and not take them away from their job
• End of month/qtr/yr – no longer top priority, but still had to keep moving
forward
• Can’t leave meetings without having some kind of a path for getting
results and accountability
accountability.
• Analyze & understand “trusted source” as well as own data
• Technology – “no one package does everything”

Case Study:
y
Case Study:
A (different) Major International Financial Institution

Business Case
Background
• Replacing 2 old, legacy Customer Information Files (CIFs)
– Operational CIF - at the individual level
– Analytical CIF (Marketing) – at the household level
• 2006 (3-4 months) high-level business requirements
• 2007 detailed requirements & project launch
• Phase 1 – Operational CIF only

– O
Only
l one source system
t
– More simple, individual-only matching (no hierarchical householding)

Business Case
Business Case
• Strong Sr Mgmt support allowed faster, general business case –
detailed, long-term ROI wasn’t required
• But middle mgmt less satisfied with strategic value

– Often challenged for hard ROI numbers
– Focused on adding value now instead of 1 year from now
• Phase 2 – Incorporate Analytical CIF

– More complex hierarchical household matching
– More likelihood of conflicts = greater need for governance
– Defering data augmentation until Phase 2

Data Qualityy
• A single, source system used for decades
• Everyone assumed there were no surprises left in data
• In fact, there were a number of surprises
“Originally we had no intention of doing much data profiling, but in

hindsight
g that was a bad decision . . .”
“A lot of people in the project understand the technology but don’t

understand the data and how it’s used on a day to day basis across
our channels and across our users.”

Data Governance
“Phase
Phase 1 only has one source system,
system the legacy CIF people are used to
using . . .”
• Currently do not have a Data Steward (in IT or Business)
• Still h
have h
had
d some struggles
t l on jjustt matching
t hi & merging
i
– Resolved with weekly all-day meetings over a couple months
• Data Steward & more formal governance planned in future phase

• Data Profiling – first & foremost
• Business Case – stick to top handful of benefits (you can drive

yourself crazy with a thousand different benefits)
• Executive
ecut e suppo
supportt iss critical
c t ca
– It’s not a 12-24 month project and then your done.
– It’s a 10-20 year investment
• Lay out strategy long before you start anything else (several people
over 3-4 months))

• Planned tightly controlled rollout in 2008 (users, dependencies, etc)

– but everyone now saying “me first!”
• Defering
D f i complexity
l it tto Ph
Phase 2 (householding,
(h h ldi augmentation,
t ti
analytical support, etc.)
– Greatly helped maintain focus & delivery deadlines
– “one of the best things we’ve done in hindsight”
• SIs may want to do things the quickest and easiest way which might
not be the best way for us long term
• Had to ask Sr Mgmt to step in a couple times early on to resolve

priority disputes for data domain experts’ time

Case Study:
y
Case Study:
A (3rd) Major International Financial Institution

Business Case
Background:
• Already had a centralized database
• Loading a lot of data making broadly avail to the org
• Originally only planned a simple “Data Steward” program
• But quickly realized that there was a lack of governance throughout
tthe
e organization
o ga at o o on data
Business Case:
• (some) Sr Mgmt realized need to transition from being just a “data
steward team” to providing data governance for the entire
organization
g
• Used “grass root” support of middle-mgmt peers to help convince
their bosses

Data Qualityy
• “We identified some major issues where the same field in the
database is being use for four or five purposes… “
• “difficult to measure quality - we’re fighting every step”
• “if you really want quality data – it’s going to take years, it’s an
iterative process
process.

Data Governance
• Already had an executive steering committee
• Trying to maintain independence of the business and technology

– but partnering with both groups in order to get things done
• Domain steward – 1 for each system

y of record
– updated job descriptions so it becomes part of their ongoing
responsibility, such as maintaining metadata, and then it’s reflected within
their annual p
performance appraisal.
pp
“The great thing is the way we’ve set up our governance structure
b
because it goes tto a single
i l person and d th
thatt person can make
k th
the
decision rather than trying to get together 40 bodies”

• Get the governance structure set up and bought into

– A
Appropriate
i t processes and d controls
t l iin place
l as well,
ll ffrom metadata
t d t tto
rolls and responsibilities
– Defining Data Stewards is not enough
• Pull in an SI to help get it done

– “No sense bleeding g through
g things
g yyou could have someone come in and
in 3-4 weeks, jump start your program by 24 months.”
– Also helped in terms of credibility - more reassurance to Sr Mgmt
• Invest significant resources in metadata repository

– Plan more time, effort & tools than “just mapping fields in Excel”
“You’re always at risk of losing that smart guy who knows how the
system works and what each one of those elements meant. As soon
as that guy walks out the door
door, you lose all of that history
history.”
Case Study:
y
Case Study:
A Major Health Insurance Company

Business Case
Background
• Started as a “Data Warehousing” project
• Evolved into an enterprise “Single Customer View” project
• Early results were disappointing & hurt credibility
• Uncovered need to resolve internal priority conflicts
• 350+ users depend
d d on results
lt every d
day

Business Case
Business case:
• Fundamental issue of “same” reports from different departments
providing different numbers
• Informal business rules could change “on-the-fly” within departments, so
even reports from the same department may not agree month-to-month
• Started as a focused Marketing effort to prove value for taking the next
step at the enterprise level
• Driven by Director of Business Intelligence
• Implemented over a series of 3 project to incrementally achieve
integration via “transition hubs”

Data Qualityy
“Shoot
Shoot the Messenger
Messenger”
Initial release revealed true magnitude & scope of problems:

• Tremendously hurt confidence of project results
• Increased motivation & justification for more dept silos
• Vendors
V d ffurther
th encourageddddeptt silos
il tto solve
l problems
bl
“we can do it faster...”

Data Qualityy
“Why
Why do you think there are problems when we’re
we re doing fine on the front
end?”
Determined key cause was conflict of fundamental priorities between

front-end & back-end of business
• Front: #enrolls, #claims processed, #calls = min data
• Back – actuaries, underwriters, utilization analysts, marketing need
way more data = more keystrokes to tie things together
“When you have million dollar claims coming through, it just takes one
error to have a major impact”
impact

Data Governance
• Start trying to resolve rogue DMs through consensus, but ended up

needing Exec mandate
• But mandate required early, document success of resolving DQ
issues from initial project
• Convinced Chief Actuary to present DQ issues, business impact &
solution strategy to other VPs
• Saw light bulbs go on around the room “oh, we better help out here”
• Senior VP mandate enabled us to shut down new DM efforts early

• “The Single Customer View is seen as a pain in the ass sometimes”

• Still fight some of the same battles of departments trying to build
private data marts
• Should have done better expectations management for DQ
• Took surprising effort to get the message out about what we were
doing to address DQ
• Importance of translating DQ & Single Customer View errors into
“business impact” (not just # of errors)
• Training for new employees
“Jane resolved 10 p
problems while the new g
guyy created 5 new ones”

Session End
Questions & Answers

Session End
Questions & Answers

MDM Workshop 02-Case Studies & Business Benefits (לקריאה בלבד) (מצב תאימות)

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

MDM Workshop 02-Case Studies & Business Benefits (לקריאה בלבד) (מצב תאימות)

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DataDelta Master Data Management (MDM) Workshop

Aaron Zornes Ed Allburn

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 1

• Data structures & business Value of Integration

• Underlying IT infrastructure Value

EAI = enterprise application integration

Global competition mandates

• Just-in-time 21st century business

Contemporary business strategies mandate flexible

1. Catalyzes market leadership & dominance

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 4

• Maximizes walletshare across product lines & BUs

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 5

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 6

• Drives costs of “dirty data” out of the info supply chain

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 7

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 8

• Centrally manages privacy preferences for consistent rules of visibility &

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 9

• Financial services providers (FSPs)

Early adopters of MDM solutions include: FSPs, CSPs, Pharma &

• Optimize customer profitability

FSPs must transform from customer-hostile,, batch

Customer view must prevail over product view as higher margin

• Provide single view of customer

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 13

• Proven performance & scalability

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 14

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 15

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 16

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 18

HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 20

85% Siebel Universal Customer Master

IBM Client Information Integration

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

Business Drivers Technology Challenges

Oracle Customer Data Hub

Initiate Systems Identity Hub

Siebel Universal Customer Master

2% Ascential Enterprise Integration Suite

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 23

• 10+ North American CSPs – e.g., cable Tactical ROI

– 100% with > 1M subscribers • Accelerating time-to-market of CRM, SCM, &

COTS = commercial, off-the-shelf software

M&A demands comprehensive & integrated profiles

1 75% Increased profitability

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 25

Enable product bundling

1 57% Evolve to R/T mktg campaign mgmt

Enable solution selling

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

“Enable product bundling” 50% more important as

Legacy app ingtegration (CRIS, LEIS, LEIM,

Source: MDM Institute 1H2005 MarketPulse™ Survey

“Legacy application integration (CRIS, LEIS, LEIM, USOCs)” rated

DataDelta MDM Workshop - Copyright © 2007 DataDelta, Inc. 27

• CSPs must acknowledge state-of-IT-affairs resulting from continuous

• Improve productivity of pharma sales 360° View of Customer

acquisition, retention & profitability Health

All reference data