Based on my own experience and from my interactions with other Chief Data Officer’s, there are 3 facts that are relevant to this topic.
- CDO roles differ by definition based on the model chosen.
- CDOs differ in background, responsibilities and intent.
- CDO organizations take different maturity and evolution paths.
The definition, right choice of candidate, and maturity path are collectively influenced by the model / approach taken from a coverage standpoint – how comprehensive, targeted or expansive the positioning is. Also, there can be continuous role expansion based on the extent of opportunities and problems that a company strives to solve through the data, analytic and digital initiatives - which is why choosing a CDO who can grow / adapt with the role expansion is critical.
In some scenarios, given the complexity and size of the organization, it is impossible for the one CDO to grow as the needs expand, and this situation can be handled by splitting the roles at various levels, or supporting the function with good leaders across business and technology areas to achieve desired results in a coordinated fashion.
CDO roles differ by definition based on the model chosen:
The following 3 variations largely shape up the way the CDO role would have to be defined. The type of person you need is determined by the intersection of these variations for your situation and weighting involved for each variation.
For example, if the expectation is that the central CDO organization will be providing oversight, policy and guidance and play a passive role in actually determining the future direction of the data and analytics landscape and that would be left to the CDOs or data teams at the entity level, then you need a different type of CDO at the center than at the entity-level. More of this when we discuss the second point.
CDOs differ in background, responsibilities and intent:
It should come as no surprise that if the expectations on the CDO differ based on their positioning, the qualifications and experience will be vastly different as well. People move into CDO roles from very different backgrounds – as diverse as PMO, Marketing, Business Analysis, Risk Management, Finance, Marketing and Technology. Some of them are extremely process oriented, while others are highly business-oriented while a segment of them are highly technical. But they all better be big-picture players, otherwise, it’s easy to get sucked into the tactical nightmare.
I am a big proponent of taking a fluid approach to organizational design and candidate selection. i.e., the right organizational design and the perfect candidate is completely based on the company’s needs, problems and opportunities at that time. It is similar to trying to determine which player will help win the game. It depends on your opponents and the situation you are in the game. Sometimes, an offensive strategy would work, while other times, you need a much cautious defensive approach.
Determining who would be a good fit is therefore a decision based on the analysis of current state problems, mandates, cultural barriers for change, C-suite appetite to accepting current state findings and willingness to support change, as well as a dose of reality with regards to how much traction and / or change can be embraced by the user community – IT and Business.
Always hire for attitude, aptitude and broad-based experience. You can assign accountability within the CDO function and support the function based on available skill sets from other areas. But a person with experience / background in only one area – process, technology or business is a high-risk candidate, because even if supported by experts, the core thought-leadership needs to come from the CDO.
There is widespread belief that the CDO role is a Business role and I disagree.
This is a blog topic on its own. And would be a controversial one too. There is widespread belief that the CDO role is a Business role and I disagree. It is not a technology role either. For the CDO to be effective, the candidate needs to be a Business-Technologist. Someone who has been on both sides.
CDO organizations take different maturity and evolution paths.
If I have been eating like a pig for 30+ years with a sedentary lifestyle and I wake up one day and decide I am going to eat healthy, do it for 4 days and expect lasting results, is that realistic? If I am serious about transformation, I need to go through a 3-step cycle of 1) recognizing the bad habits, 2) interrupting / stopping them & replacing with good habits and 3) ensure I continue on that path vigorously till I see results and embed the good habits into my daily rituals till it becomes my new lifestyle.
The same is true for the maturity and evolution that a CDO organization will need to go through. Considering that this is a new concept to many companies and even in companies where the function has been established and in practice for a few years now, there is a real learning, adoption and maturity curve that every CDO organization needs to go through. It involves current state analysis, fit / responsibilities definition, functional / organizational design, hiring, tools & technology landscape analysis and evolution, defining relationships, accountability and milestone handshakes with other functions.
Executive support is critical throughout this journey and since all businesses are constantly evolving and changing, CDO needs to prepare for situations that involve changes in sponsorship, reporting structures or even firm-wide priorities. I have been in situations where I was running about 9 months slower in my own plans, for factors beyond my control. There is no point in beating yourself up for things you have no control of but rather focus on how to move the dial through continuous efforts. The efforts will soon reach a tipping point when you will realize wholesale benefits and visual changes. Until they appear, move through challenges.
Lastly, shifting of execution responsibilities is a nature of the game. For example, a CDO team is accountable for ensuring good quality data across the firm’s data assets. Who does the development is immaterial. For the sake of efficiency and better overall process management, it is ok to shift execution responsibilities, as long as the independent authority for governance and data quality is maintained.
Disclaimer: All thoughts, ideas and opinions expressed in my articles are my own and do not reflect the views of my current / past employers or clients. No references or details will be provided in these articles that would expose any trade secrets or inner operations of any company whatsoever.
Other articles in this series:
0. The CDO Journey: A practitioner’s perspective
1. A case for the CDO
2. How to strategically position the CDO organisation for success?
To read all articles in this series, click here.
Prakash Bhaskaran is a Business-Technology leader with a passion for solving complex business problems and challenges, using a combination of business process, technology, data, analytics and organisational transformation. Through his varied experience across manufacturing / supply chain, higher education, software development, banking and financial sectors, he helps companies excel at managing data as an asset.
Contact Prakash on LinkedIn; Twitter; Email
