How do you or your organization use this solution?
Please share with us so that your peers can learn from your experiences.
This solution is still an experiment for us. My company is in the process of defining the data governance process, which is not settled right now. We have used erwin DG for the purpose of getting acquainted with data governance from a technical point of view. We want to see how it fits in our organization because data governance is neither IT nor a business matter. It is in-between. We have to put the proper organization in place in order for an IT solution to meet all the requirements. This has been in the works for almost two years now, where we have been formerly under an experiment with erwin DG. We are not fully using it as we would if it were in production running regular operations. What we have done with the tool is have a metamodel for our data and try to see how it fits with the requirements of our project, businesses, and IT. We have two cases that are fully documented under erwin DG. What we are trying to do right now is to integrate all our regulatory obligations, including laws and regulations at the French and European levels. This would enable us to make a bridge between the businesses and the law. This is a SaaS solution maintained by erwin.
We don't have all of the EDGE products. We are using the Data Intelligence Suite (DI). So, we don't have the enterprise architecture piece, but you can pick them up in a modular form as part of the EDGE Suite. The Data Intelligence Suite of the EDGE tool is very focused on asset management. You have a metadata manager that you can schedule to harvest all of your servers, cataloging information. So, it brings back the database, tables, columns and all of the information about it into a repository. It also has the ability to build ETL specs. With Mapping Manager, you then take your list of assets and connect them together as a Source-to-Target with the transformation rules that you can set up as reusable pieces in a library. The DBAs can use it for all different types of value-add from their side of the house. They have the ability to see particular aspects, such as RPII, and there are some neat reports which show that. They are able manage who can look at these different pieces of information. That's the physical side of the house, and they also have what they call data literacy, which is the data glossary side of the house. This is more business-facing. You can create directories that they call catalogs, and inside of those, you can build logical naming conventions to put definitions on. It all connects together. You can map the business understanding in your glossary back to your physical so you can see it both ways.
We're a medical company and we have our own source systems that process claims from multiple organizations or health plans. In our world, there are about 17 different health plans. Within each of those health plans, the membership, or the patients, have multiple lines of businesses, and the way our company is organized, we're in three different markets with up to 17 different IPAs (Independent Physician Associations). While that is a mouthful, because of data governance, and our having own data governance tool, we understand those are key concepts and that is our use case: so that everybody in our organization knows what we are talking about. Whether it is an institutional claim, a professional claim, Blue Cross or Blue Shield, health plan payer, group titles, names, etc., our case represents 18 different titles. For us, there was a massive number of concepts and we didn't have any centralized data dictionary of our data. Our company had grown over the course of 20 years. We went from one IPA and one health plan to where we are today: in five markets, doing three major lines of businesses, etc. The medical industry in general is about 20 years behind, technology-wise, in most cases; there are a lot of manual processes. Our test use case was to start from fresh after 20 years of experience and evolution and just start over. I was given the opportunity to build a data strategy, a three-year plan where we build a repository of all sources of truth data used in governance. We have our mapping, our design, our data linkage, principles, business rules, and data stewardship program. Three years later, here we are.
The three big areas that we use it for right now: metadata management as a whole, versioning of metadata, and metadata mappings and automation. We have started to adopt data profiling from this tool, but it is an ongoing process. I will be adding these capabilities to my team probably in Q1 of this year.