Master Data Management Health Check

Your MDM is live. The business still will not use it.

A short, fixed-price review of what was configured, what it is producing, and what would have to change for the golden record to be trusted. You keep the findings whether or not we work together afterwards.

Two to three weeks, fixed scope, fixed fee — no open-ended discovery
Reviewed by someone who has configured these platforms, not a generalist auditor
Prioritised by business impact, not a list of everything imperfect
Delivered as a roadmap you can execute with any partner, including your current one

Symptoms

Six signs a Health Check is worth its fee.

If two or more of these describe your programme, the underlying cause is usually configuration decisions taken early — and they are still fixable.

The business keeps its own spreadsheet

The clearest signal of all. When teams maintain a parallel list, they have already judged the golden record and found it wanting.

Records are merging that should not be

Over-matching destroys confidence faster than under-matching and is far harder to unwind. One wrongly merged customer can discredit an entire dataset.

The stewardship queue only grows

The platform is generating more tasks than the team can clear. Downstream, an unworked backlog is indistinguishable from bad data.

Go-live has slipped more than once

Usually a symptom of unresolved ownership rather than technical difficulty — a disagreement about who is authoritative, surfacing as a delivery problem.

Nobody can explain why two records merged

If the match logic is not explainable to a business owner, it will not be trusted by one, regardless of how well it performs statistically.

An AI or analytics initiative is blocked

The programme downstream has stopped, and the reason given is data quality — but nobody has isolated which definitions are actually in conflict.

The engagement

What a Health Check actually involves.

No discovery phase that turns into a project. A defined review, a written outcome, and a decision you can make with better information than you have now.

Duration

2–3 weeks

Investment

₹3.5L – ₹6L · $4,000 – $7,000

What you receive

Data model and domain review
Match rule analysis with measured precision and recall
Survivorship and trust hierarchy assessment
Stewardship workload versus team capacity
Integration and downstream consumption review
Data quality baseline and scorecard
Governance and ownership gap analysis
Prioritised risk register
Sequenced remediation roadmap
Executive readout session

Request a Health Check

Scope and fee depend on the number of domains and source systems in scope. We confirm both in writing before any work starts — there is no variable component.

What you receive

What a finding looks like.

Every finding carries the evidence behind it, what it costs the business, and the change that fixes it. The three below were written for this page to show the format; they are not drawn from a client engagement.

Address carries too much weight in the customer match rule

Evidence: In the labelled sample, most wrong merges share an address but not a person: family members, shared offices, a reception desk.
Impact: Separate customers are combined, so sales stops trusting the record and keeps its own account list.
Fix: Require a second strong identifier before an automatic merge, and route address-only matches to a steward.

One source wins every attribute

Evidence: Survivorship is set to source priority across the board, so contact data entered in the CRM overwrites validated billing addresses.
Impact: Invoices go to stale addresses and finance stops using the golden record.
Fix: Survivorship per attribute, agreed with its owner: billing owns the invoice address, the CRM owns contact preferences.

The stewardship queue outgrows the team

Evidence: More review tasks are created each week than the team closes, and most are low-value potential matches.
Impact: The backlog grows without limit, and downstream it looks the same as bad data.
Fix: Raise automatic-merge confidence where precision is proven, suppress low-value tasks, and size the team to what remains.

How it runs

Three weeks, four checkpoints.

Scoping call

Forty-five minutes. Platform, domains, symptoms and who owns what. We confirm scope and fee in writing after this.

Access and review

Read-only access to configuration and a labelled data sample. Interviews with stewards and the business owners who consume the record.

Analysis

Match rules measured against the sample. Survivorship traced per attribute. Stewardship volume compared to real capacity.

Readout

Written findings, prioritised risks and a sequenced roadmap, presented to your team with the trade-offs made explicit.

What we will tell you, including when it is unwelcome

If the platform is configured correctly and the real problem is organizational — no agreed data owner, no mandate for stewardship, a business that was never consulted — we will say so, and a remediation project will not fix it. If your existing partner is doing good work and the issue is scope or sequencing, we will say that too. The report is worth more to you than the follow-on engagement is to us.

Reltio consulting Informatica MDM consulting Data readiness for AI

Questions

Master data management health check: common questions.

What is a master data management health check?

A fixed-scope, independent review of a live MDM implementation. We examine the data model, match and merge rules, survivorship and trust configuration, stewardship workload, integrations and governance, then deliver prioritised findings and a sequenced remediation roadmap.

How long does it take and what does it cost?

Two to three weeks. The fee is ₹3.5L to ₹6L (US$4,000 to $7,000), depending on the number of domains and source systems in scope. Scope and fee are confirmed in writing before any work starts, with no variable component.

Which MDM platforms do you review?

Reltio and Informatica MDM, both on-premises and cloud. If you run another platform, ask: we will tell you plainly whether we have the depth to review it.

What access do you need?

Read-only access to the configuration, a labelled sample of records, and interviews with the stewards and the business owners who consume the golden record. We do not need write access to production.

Can our current implementation partner stay involved?

Yes. The roadmap is written so that any partner, including your current one, can carry it out. If your partner is doing good work and the issue is scope or sequencing, the report will say so.

What happens after the Health Check?

You keep the findings whether or not we work together. Typical next steps are match-rule tuning, a survivorship redesign, stewardship workflow changes, or a governance decision that no configuration change can replace.

Is this the same as a mobile device management (MDM) health check?

No. This is master data management: keeping one trusted record of customers, products, suppliers and other core entities across systems. Mobile device management reviews cover device policies, which is not something we do.

Two to three weeks to know where you actually stand.

Send us the platform, the domains in scope and what the business is saying. We will come back with a scope, a fee and dates — or tell you a Health Check is not what you need.

Reltio and Informatica are trademarks of their respective owners. VYLQORA implements, migrates and supports these platforms; naming them describes the technologies we work on and does not imply partnership, certification or endorsement by either vendor. Our platform recommendations are independent — we accept no commission, referral fee or incentive from any software vendor.