Separately identifying Internal vs External areas of data
As our initial foot print of defined data assets grow, we have a use case for identifying the data that has been ingested by the organization from external entities, as opposed to the data that is generated/created by internal processes. Externally sourced data needs to be identified to enable both review and controls for proper access, as well as to support a wider range of internal users who might find these data assets useful.
Would identifying the different areas of data as separate Data Sets be a viable way to support this? We’d like to have all the different External data assets covered by the process, so if I have 2, or 20 or 200 different areas of External data assets, can we use any hierarchical sorts of groupings, to allow general data users a means to look at the “External Data Sets” main topic, and drill down to find individual Data Sets for particular types of external sources or types of data.
And taking a bit further, would it make sense to implement a Data Sharing Agreement type workflow, where we could set up the roles and responsibilities for Contracts, Legal, Security, Privacy, Compliance as well as the identified data owner, to participate in a process to properly onboard these types of data?
Thank you!
Alexandra Jorgenson
Admin4 years ago · Edited@mkuhnhenn.geico.com, are you still interested in feedback on this issue because if so, I have some ways to try and get you some responses :)!
Alexandra Jorgenson
Admin4 years ago · EditedMark, I got your DM response that this is still a concern of yours: “…a process to differentiate the data assets we have registered in our Collibra system that come from internal processes from those data assets we get access to via agreements with external agencies. Basically, how can we identify this aspect of the differences in those general types of data?”. If anyone has any experience with this, please chime in. Otherwise, I’ll track down some advice internally here at Collibra.