Restricted Hierarchies
We are trying to represent hierarchies in Collibra where each ranked group is strictly related to the group directly above or below it…
For example: We want to represent States, Counties and Cities. We want to rank them in tiers (example: Falls Church is a part of Arlington County, and Arlington County is a part of Virginia). However, we don’t want the wrong tiers to be formed (we don’t want to allow for a case where "Falls Church is a part of Virginia).
Is there a way in Collibra to allow for this sort of hierarchy out of the box? It does not necessarily have to be using relations. We are wondering whether Code Set and Code Values would work, or using complex relations?
Sadad Talhouni
Posted 5 years ago · Edited 1 year ago·Last reply 5 years ago
7 comments
Former User
·5 years ago · EditedSadad, @ronald.schaareman has advised you well. You can’t have a hierarchy without asset types to relate in the hierarchy. Also, consider reference data management in DGC. Wouldn’t this be purchased, external data in the case of the geography/location data you’re discussing?
Ronald Schaareman
·5 years ago · EditedHi @sadad.talhouni.pacificlife.com,
You can use the out of the box relationship Business Asset ‘is grouped by’ Business Asset. As long as you make sure you fill the grouping as you want them to be (so Falls Church is grouped by Arlington Country, Arlington country is grouped by Virginia and Verona is grouped by Augusta County, Augusta County is grouped by Virginia) it can’t go wrong when you create a view with a hierarchy based on this. If you fill it correctly DGC makes sure that Falls Church won’t come up as part of Augusta County.
Kind regards,
Ronald
Sadad Talhouni
OP5 years ago · EditedThanks Ronald, the “is grouped by” might be the approach that makes the most sense. However, by my understanding, I would technically still be able to unintentionally create a relation of “Falls Church is grouped by Virginia”. I realize it is rather a narrow use case where relations would need to be limited based on a specific characteristic of an Asset.
Kind regards,
Sadad
Ronald Schaareman
·5 years ago · EditedHi @sadad.talhouni.pacificlife.com,
You can use the out of the box relationship Business Asset ‘is grouped by’ Business Asset. As long as you make sure you fill the grouping as you want them to be (so Falls Church is grouped by Arlington Country, Arlington country is grouped by Virginia and Verona is grouped by Augusta County, Augusta County is grouped by Virginia) it can’t go wrong when you create a view with a hierarchy based on this. If you fill it correctly DGC makes sure that Falls Church won’t come up as part of Augusta County.
Kind regards,
Ronald
Ronald Schaareman
·5 years ago · EditedHi @sadad.talhouni.pacificlife.com,
No matter how advanced you define your operating model, mistakes can still be made
If that is your fear, you might want to establish a 4-eye principle, optionally supported by one of the out-of-the-box approval workflows.
Kind regards,
Ronald
arthurburkhardt
·5 years ago · EditedYou can create specific asset types for States, counties and cities. This will allow you to specify their relationships and how they are represented in the hierarchy.
Otherwise: https://datacitizens.collibra.com/forum/t/hierarchy-of-code-values/191
Sadad Talhouni
OP5 years ago · EditedThanks, Arthur. The solution of creating specific asset types would work, however we are trying to avoid creating custom asset types for each scenario.
And thanks for the link to you question, we actually looked through it before posting this question since that seemed to be similar to our issue initially.