Where each record lives

The problem it solves

A client's name is spelled four different ways across the systems the company uses every day, and none of the four is wrong. Each department created its own record when it needed one and defined it for its own work.

To sales a client is whoever signs; to dispatch it is the address the goods go to; to accounting it is whoever pays. All three definitions work inside their own department and none of them can talk to the others. When somebody asks how many active clients the company has, the answer depends on who is asked, and the meeting turns into a negotiation about definitions instead of a decision. Meanwhile each area keeps its own corrections: an address is updated in one place and stays stale in the other three, with nobody knowing which of the four the next person will consult.

Connecting the systems in that state does not settle the underlying problem. Without a prior decision about which record rules on what and who maintains each field, a connection reconciles nothing: it distributes the same discrepancy across more places and makes it harder to find. And when a value ends up wrong in two systems at once, there is nobody to ask, because nobody was ever named.

What it covers

The workshop opens with an inventory that almost always surprises the room. In a group exercise, participants list the entities their company talks about every day, client, product or service, employee, order, supplier, and then write down every place each one is recorded today, including personal spreadsheets, paper forms and somebody's notebook. The list is usually longer than the group expected, and its length already explains a good share of the company's internal arguments.

The second part is the hardest and the most productive: definition. Before deciding which system rules, the group has to agree what each thing is. Using a worksheet, each entity is defined in one sentence every department is willing to sign, and the exceptions are named rather than hidden, because a definition without declared exceptions breaks on the first unusual case. This is where the group discovers that several arguments it thought were about systems were actually about judgement.

The third part assigns responsibility. For each entity, the group determines the system of record, the direction information travels to the others, who may create a record, who may correct it and who may only read it. Then it drops to field level, which is where the real conflicts sit: the department that sets the price is not the one that sets the delivery address, and that is worth writing down before somebody overwrites it.

The closing section covers the exchange agreement and a decision few groups expect: not every silo should be removed. For each candidate connection the group defines what is sent, at what moment, what happens when it fails and who finds out, then weighs that against a periodic reconciliation performed by a named person, which in some cases is the right design. Through action planning, the group decides which connection is worth building first and which ones are better left unbuilt for now.

What participants learn

• Identify every location where each business entity is recorded today, including those outside the official systems.
• Develop a definition of each entity that the departments involved can sign, with its exceptions declared.
• Design the system-of-record map and the direction information flows for each entity.
• Assign responsibility at field level: who creates, who corrects and who only reads.
• Evaluate when a connection between systems is the answer and when a periodic reconciliation with a named owner is.

Agenda

1. 01An inventory of entities and every place they are recorded
2. 02Definitions each department treats as obvious and that do not match
3. 03Declared exceptions: why a definition without them breaks
4. 04System of record per entity and the direction of flow
5. 05Field-level responsibility: creating, correcting and reading
6. 06The exchange agreement: what is sent, when, and what happens on failure
7. 07Silos worth keeping, and reconciliations with an owner
8. 08Which connection to build first and which one to postpone

What the organisation leaves with

• A written inventory of the business entities and every place they are recorded today.
• An agreed definition of each entity, with exceptions named and the departments that signed it.
• A system-of-record and field-responsibility table: who creates, who corrects and who reads.
• A prioritised list of connections with the agreement on what is sent, when, and who is told on failure.