Some companies don't take action on data quality
problems until it is too late. These firms can end up suffering serious damage as the result of an information integrity mishap and immediately spend on solutions to patch the problem, despite an unwillingness to commit money to the danger in advance. Data quality blogger Jim Harris stated that these issues may have their roots in psychology.
Harris referred to the work of Daniel Kahneman, specifically the concept of availability bias. Corporate boards do not have solid proof of the negative effects of a future data quality mishap, meaning they will be reluctant to commit resources to plans.
No matter what tactic instigators use to try and sell upper management on data improvement plans, they will likely have trouble, according to Harris. Asking them to list several incidents and the difficulty of doing so may convince them they have nothing to fear. Similarly, bringing up only one past failure could be labeled a fluke.
Boards may soon have members with a specialty in data, however. TechTarget recently reported that analytics expert William Hakes believes the creation of a C-level position centered on data usage and business intelligence will help companies unite their information operations.