November’s Badger Data Network featured a panel of data governance experts from four higher education institutions who discussed the similarities and differences in program structure and implementation, as well as shared opportunities and difficulties.
The group identified several options for institutions to collaborate. They discussed the importance of developing explicit information about data governance expectations and duties in job descriptions. Another collective approach was learning from other institutions’ success, including their policies, recognizing that not everything must be created from scratch. Presenters underscored the need to benchmark data governance implementation to enable institutions to better connect around shared challenges and successes.
The group highlighted issues they experienced while implementing and maintaining shared governance programs across decentralized campuses, including balancing mandates and grassroots efforts, engaging faculty and staff, identifying individuals with the skill sets to be data stewards, and increasing data literacy. Involving audiences in data governance is rewarding and takes hard work. Multiple tactics for doing this were shared, including:
- Building and relying on data communities, such as the Badger Data Network
- A just-in-time approach. When people want to use or have access to data, a conversation about data governance occurs
- Understanding the needs of users so you can assist them in solving problems
- Publishing newsletters
- Tying data governance to a data strategy
- Holding a data institute— 2025 institute | 2024 Institute
- Partnering with data stewards to learn the issues they are experiencing within their domain.
Last, there was a universal need to change the belief that data governance was about restricting data access rather than a program to ensure data, a valuable asset, is in the right hands for a valid reason.
We appreciate our panelists sharing their ideas, experience, and expertise. We were joined by:
- Lisa Johnston, Data Governance Director, UW–Madison, Data, Academic Planning & Institutional Research (DAPIR)
- Melissa Barnett, Georgia State, Data Governance Manager, Office of Institutional Effectiveness
- Ravneet Chadha, University of Arizona Chief Data Officer and Associate Vice President, University Analytics & Institutional Research
- Olivia Kew-Fickus, Vanderbilt University, Chief Data Officer
Our panelists agreed that data governance programs require continual improvement. Madison has a robust data stewardship program, well-defined domains, and a three-tiered responsibility system (trustees, data governance council, and data stewards). In the future, Madison would like to expand data literacy efforts and broaden its understanding of the rules and regulations impacting the data we manage.