Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

On the Evolution of Data Governance in Firms: The Case of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products North America

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Handbook of Data Quality

Abstract

Data Governance defines decision-making rights for company-wide use of data. The topic has received increased attention both in the scientific and in the practitioners’ community, as the quality of data meanwhile is increasingly being considered a key prerequisite for companies for being able to meet a number of strategic business requirements, such as compliance with a growing number of legal provisions or pursuit of a customer-centric business model. While first results can be found in literature addressing Data Governance arrangements, no studies have been published so far investigating the evolution of Data Governance over time. Drawing on theory about organizational capabilities, the chapter assumes that Data Governance can be considered a dynamic capability and that the concept of capability lifecycles can be applied. A single-case study conducted at Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products, North America, is presented to explore the research question as to how Data Governance effectiveness can be measured as the ratio of the number of preventive data quality management (DQM) measures to the total number of DQM measures in order to trace the evolution of Data Governance over time. The findings suggest that Data Governance can in fact be seen as a dynamic capability and that its effectiveness evolves according to a lifecycle curve. Furthermore, the chapter discusses a maturity model which can be used as an instrument to manage and monitor this evolution.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    See http://www.asug.com/Communities/ASUGSpecialInterestGroups.aspx for details.

  2. 2.

    In the following referred to as Johnson & Johnson

  3. 3.

    For more information on Johnson & Johnson’s Consumer Products division, see http://www.jnj.com/connect/about-jnj/company-structure/consumer-healthcare.

  4. 4.

    See http://www.gs1.org/gdsn.

  5. 5.

    See http://www.cubiscan.com/ for details.

References

  1. Weber K, Otto B, Österle H (2009) One size does not fit all—a contingency approach to data governance. ACM J Data Inf Qual 1(1):Article 4

    Google Scholar 

  2. Khatri V, Brown CV (2010) Designing data governance. Commun ACM 53(1):148–152

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. IBM (2011) IBM Forms Data Governance Council 2005, February 9, 2011. http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/7766.wss#release

  4. AFNOR (2009) General principles for an environmental communication on mass market products. 2009, AFNOR Groupe: La Plaine Saint-Denis, France

    Google Scholar 

  5. Deloitte (2009) Telecommunications Predictions: TMT Trends 2009. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, London

    Google Scholar 

  6. Otto B (2011) A morphology of the organisation of data governance. In: 19th European Conference on Information Systems, Helsinki, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  7. Pierce E, Dismute WS, Yonke CL (2008) The state of information and data governance—understanding how organizations govern their information and data assets. IAIDQ and UALR-IQ, Little Rock, AR

    Google Scholar 

  8. Badenoch D et al (1994) The value of information. In: Feeney M, Grieves M (eds) The value and impact of information. Bowker-Saur, London, pp 9–75

    Google Scholar 

  9. Boisot M, Canals A (2004) Data, information and knowledge: have we got it right? J Evol Econ 14(1):43–67

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Oppenheim C, Stenson J, Wilson RMS (2003) Studies on information as an asset I: definitions. J Inf Sci 29(3):159–166

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Van den Hoven J (1999) Information resource management: Stewards of data. Inf Syst Manag 16(1):88–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Holtham C (1995) Resolving the imbalance between information and technology. In: Best D (ed) The fourth resource: information and its management. Aslib/Gower, Aldershot, UK, pp 41–58

    Google Scholar 

  13. Wang RY (1998) A product perspective on total data quality management. Commun ACM 41(2):58–65

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Olson J (2003) Data quality—the accuracy dimension. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  15. Redman TC (2001) Data quality. The field guide. Digital Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  16. Wang RY, Strong DM (1996) Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J Manag Inf Syst 12(4):5–34

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Horne NW (1995) Information as an asset—the board agenda. Comput Audit Update 1995(9):5–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Even A, Shankaranarayanan G (2007) Utility-driven assessment of data quality. ACM SIGMIS Database 38(2):75–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. DAMA (2009) The DAMA guide to the data management body of knowledge. Technics Publications, Bradley Beach

    Google Scholar 

  20. Helfert M (2002) Proaktives Datenqualitätsmanagement in Data-Warehouse-Systemen: Qualitätsplanung und Qualitätslenkung (Germ.: Proactive data quality management in data warehouse systems: Quality planning and controlling). Logos, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  21. Batini C et al (2009) Methodologies for data quality assessment and improvement. ACM Comput Surv 41(3):1–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Wang RY et al (1998) Manage your information as a product. Sloan Manag Rev 39(4):95–105

    Google Scholar 

  23. ISO/IEC (2008) ISO/IEC 38500: corporate governance of information technology. ISO (the International Organization for Standardization) and IEC (the International Electrotechnical Commission), Geneva, Switzerland

    Google Scholar 

  24. Sadiq S, Yeganeh K, Indulska M (2011) Cross-disciplinary collaborations in data quality research. In: 19th European Conference on Information Systems, Helsinki, Finland

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kooper M, Maes R, Lindgreen ER (2009) Information governance: in search of the forgotten grail. In: PrimaVera Working Paper Series. University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  26. Cragg P, Caldeira M, Ward J (2011) Organizational information systems competences in small and medium-sized enterprises. Inf Manag 48(8):353–363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lucas A (2010) Corporate data quality management in context. In: 15th International Conference on Information Quality, Little Rock, AR

    Google Scholar 

  28. Otto B (2011) Organizing data governance: findings from the telecommunications industry and consequences for large service providers. Commun AIS 29(1):45–66

    Google Scholar 

  29. Wende K, Otto B (2007) A contingency approach to data governance. In: 12th International Conference on Information Quality, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  30. Cheong LK, Chang V (2007) The need for data governance: a case study. In: Toleman M, Cater-Steel A, Roberts D (eds) 18th Australasian Conference on Information Systems. The University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, Australia, pp 999–1008

    Google Scholar 

  31. Vaygan JA et al (2007) The internal information transformation of IBM. IBM Syst J 46(4):669–683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Beynon-Davies P (2005) Personal identification in the information age: the case of the national identity card in the UK. In: 13th European Conference on Information Systems, Regensburg, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  33. Delbaere M, Ferreira R (2007) Addressing the data aspects of compliance with industry models. IBM Syst J 46(2):319–334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Ramakrishnan T, Jones MC, Sidorova A (2012) Factors influencing business intelligence (BI) data collection strategies: an empirical investigation. Decis Support Syst 52(2):486–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Smith HA, McKeen JD (2008) Developments in practice XXX: master data management: salvation or snake oil? Commun AIS 23:63–72

    Google Scholar 

  36. Williams CB, Fedorowicz J, Tomasino AP (2010) Governmental factors associated with state-wide interagency collaboration initiatives. In: 11th Annual International Conference on Digital Government Research, Puebla, Mexico, pp 14–22

    Google Scholar 

  37. Panian Z (2010) Some practical experiences in data governance. World Acad Sci Eng Technol Manag (62):939–946

    Google Scholar 

  38. Ardagna CA et al (2009) An XACML-based privacy-centered access control system. In: 1st ACM Workshop on Information Security Governance, Chicago, IL, pp 49–57

    Google Scholar 

  39. Dan A, Johnson R, Arsanjan A (2007) Information as a service: modeling and realization. In: International Workshop on Systems Development in SOA Environments

    Google Scholar 

  40. Gates C, Bishop M (2010) The security and privacy implications of using social networks to deliver healthcare. In: 3rd International Conference on Pervasive Technologies Related to Assistive Environments, Samos, Greece

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kerschbaum F, Schaad A (2008) Privacy-preserving social network analysis for criminal investigations. In: 7th ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society, Alexandria, VA, pp 9–13

    Google Scholar 

  42. Pearson S (2009) Taking account of privacy when designing cloud computing services. In: ICSE Workshop on Software Engineering Challenges of Cloud Computing, Vancouver, Canada, pp 44–52

    Google Scholar 

  43. Stell A, Sinnott R, Ajayi O (2008) Supporting UK-wide e-clinical trials and studies. In: 15th ACM Mardi Gras Conference, Baton Rouge, LA

    Google Scholar 

  44. Rifaie M, Alhajj R, Ridley M (2009) Data governance strategy: a key issue in building enterprise data warehouse. In: 11th International Conference on Information Integration and Web-based Applications & Services, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp 587–591

    Google Scholar 

  45. Gillies A, Howard J (2005) An international comparison of information in adverse events. Int J Health Care Qual Assur 18(5):343–352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Rosenbaum S (2010) Governance data and stewardship, designing data stewardship entities and advancing data access. Health Serv Res 45(5):1442–1455

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  47. Wernerfelt B (1984) A resource based view of the firm. Strateg Manag J 5(2):171–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Barney J (1991) Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J Manag 17(1):99–120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Helfat CE, Peteraf MA (2003) The dynamic resource-based view: capability lifecycles. Strateg Manag J 24(10):997–1010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Dierickx I, Cool K (1989) Asset stock accumulation and sustainability of competitive advantage. Manag Sci 35(12):1504–1511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Cepeda G, Vera D (2007) Dynamic capabilities and operational capabilities. J Bus Res 60(5):426–437

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Eisenhardt KM, Martin JA (2000) Dynamic capabilities: what are they? Strateg Manag J 21(10–11):1105–1121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Wang CL, Ahmed PK (2007) Dynamic capabilities: a review and research agenda. Int J Manag Rev 9(1):31–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Teece DJ, Pisano G, Shuen A (1997) Dynamic capabilities and strategic management. Strateg Manag J 18(7):509–533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Österle H (1996) Business engineering: transition to the networked enterprise. Electron Mark 6(2):14–16

    Google Scholar 

  56. Österle H, Blessing D (2003) Business engineering modell. In: Österle H, Winter R (eds) Business Engineering. Springer, Berlin, pp 65–85

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  57. Hüner K, Ofner M, Otto B (2009) Towards a maturity model for corporate data quality management. In: Shin D (ed) 2009 ACM Symposium on Applied Computing. Honolulu, HI, pp 231–238

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  58. Ofner M, Hüner K, Otto B (2009) Dealing with complexity: a method to adapt and implement a maturity model for corporate data quality management. In: 15th Americas Conference on Information Systems, San Francisco, CA

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yin RK (2002) Case study research: design and methods, 3rd edn. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA

    Google Scholar 

  60. Eisenhardt KM (1989) Building theories from case study research. Acad Manag Rev 14(4):532–550

    Google Scholar 

  61. Benbasat I, Goldstein DK, Mead M (1987) The case research strategy in studies of information systems. MIS Q 11(3):369–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Senger E, Österle H (2004) PROMET Business Engineering Case Studies (BECS) Version 2.0. University of St. Gallen, Institute of Information Management, St. Gallen

    Google Scholar 

  63. Weill P, Ross J (2005) A matrixed approach to designing IT governance. MIT Sloan Manag Rev 46(2):25–34

    Google Scholar 

  64. Sambamurthy V, Zmud RW (1999) Arrangements for information technology governance: a theory of multiple contingencies. MIS Q 23(2):261–290

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Teo TSH, King WR (1997) Integration between business planning and information systems planning: an evolutionary-contingency perspective. J Manag Inf Syst 14(1):185–214

    Google Scholar 

  66. Nolan RL (1973) Managing the computer resource: a stage hypothesis. Commun ACM 16(7):399–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Gibson CF, Nolan RL (1974) Managing the four stages of EDP growth. Harv Bus Rev 52(1):76–88

    Google Scholar 

  68. Crosby PB (1980) Quality is free: the art of making quality certain. Mentor, New York

    Google Scholar 

  69. Fraser P, Moultrie J, Gregory M (2002) The use of maturity models/grids as a tool in assessing product development capability. In: IEEE International Engineering Management Conference, Cambridge, UK

    Google Scholar 

  70. SEI (2006) Standard CMMI Appraisal Method for Process Improvement (SCAMPI[SM]) A, Version 1.2: Method Definition Document. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  71. Lee YW et al (2002) AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inf Manag 40:133–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. DataFlux (2007) The Data Governance Maturity Model. DataFlux Corporation, Cary

    Google Scholar 

  73. Bitterer A (2007) Gartner’s Data Quality Maturity Model. Gartner, Stamford

    Google Scholar 

  74. Ryu K-S, Park J-S, Park J-H (2006) A data quality management maturity model. Electron Telecommun Res Inst J 28(2):191–204

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  75. Baskarada S, Gao J, Koronios A (2006) Agile maturity model approach to assessing and enhancing the quality of asset information in engineering asset management information systems. In: Abramowicz W, Mayr HC (eds) 9th International Conference on Business Information Systems, Klagenfurt, Austria, pp 486–500

    Google Scholar 

  76. SEI (2006) CMMI for Development, Version 1.2. Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh

    Google Scholar 

  77. EFQM (2012) EFQM Framework for Corporate Data Quality Management. EFQM, Brussels

    Google Scholar 

  78. OMG (2006) Meta Object Facility (MOF) Core Specification—Version 2.0, 1 November 2011. http://www.omg.org/spec/MOF/2.4.1/PDF/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland

    Boris Otto

Authors
  1. Boris Otto
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Boris Otto .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia

    Shazia Sadiq

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Otto, B. (2013). On the Evolution of Data Governance in Firms: The Case of Johnson & Johnson Consumer Products North America. In: Sadiq, S. (eds) Handbook of Data Quality. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36257-6_5

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-36257-6_5

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-36256-9

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-36257-6

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation