Moreover, we conducted a non-invasive approach in which we emphasized that the firm already had the rudiments of data governance in place, and simply needed assistance in formalizing the management of the accountability of data since its principle need was providing a transparent method of data lineage.
This communications process of meeting regularly with upper level management proved to be successful in the long run, because we were able to address their concerns as soon as they arose, as well as keep them updated regarding our projects. Despite our efforts to plan as conscientiously for this project as we could, however, my team and I still encountered an instance or two of feature creep, "unforeseen requests for additions and changes that are outside the project scope" (Gube, 2008). According to the circumstances, these instances were actually quite understandable, as one of the top executives wanted to make a last-minute switch to a different data governance software that in theory would have still worked with the...
Instead of hearing about this change from second-hand sources in a delayed method that could have jeopardized the timeline the project was completed in, we found about this request readily and were actually able to veto when we explained that despite the economic benefits that it could bring, it was not as effective a data lineage management tool as the software that we had already planned on using. Thus we were able to complete the project on time.
References
Haughey, D. (2013). "Project planning a step-by-step guide." ProjectSmart. Retrieved January 31 from http://www.projectsmart.co.uk/project-planning-step-by-step.html
Gube, J. (2008). "Eight tips on how to manage feature creep." Six Revisions. Retrieved January 31 from http://sixrevisions.com/project-management/eight-tips-on-how-to-manage-feature-creep/
