C. Cappiello
C. Cerletti
Abstract
Data quality has gained momentum among organizations upon the realization that poor data quality might cause failures and/or inefficiencies, thus compromising business processes and application results. However, enterprises often adopt data quality assessment and improvement methods based on practical and empirical approaches without conducting a rigorous analysis of the data quality issues and outcome of the enacted data quality improvement practices. In particular, data quality management, especially the identification of the data quality dimensions to be monitored and improved, is performed by knowledge workers on the basis of their skills and experience. Control methods are therefore designed on the basis of expected and evident quality problems; thus, these methods may not be effective in dealing with unknown and/or unexpected problems. This article aims to provide a methodology, based on fault injection, for validating the data quality actions used by organizations. We show how it is possible to check whether the adopted techniques properly monitor the real issues that may damage business processes. At this stage, we focus on scoring processes, i.e., those in which the output represents the evaluation or ranking of a specific object. We show the effectiveness of our proposal by means of a case study in the financial risk management area.
- Carlo Batini and Monica Scannapieco. 2016. Data and Information Quality: Dimensions, Principles and Techniques. Springer. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- Eta S. Berner, Ramkumar K. Kasiraman, Feliciano B. Yu, Midge N. Ray, and Thomas K. Houston. 2005. Data quality in the outpatient setting: Impact on clinical decision support systems. In Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association Annual Symposium (AMIA’05).Google Scholar
- BSI. 2015. Systems and Software Engineering—Systems and Software Quality Requirements and Evaluation (SQuaRE)—Measurement of Data Quality. ISO/IEC 25024:2015. Retrieved December 2, 2017, from https://www.iso.org/standard/35749.html.Google Scholar
- Fabrizio De Amicis and Carlo Batini. 2004. A methodology for data quality assessment on financial data. Studies in Communication Sciences 4, 2, 115--137.Google Scholar
- J. Debattista, S. Auer, and C. Lange. 2016. Luzzu—a framework for linked data quality assessment. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 10th International Conference on Semantic Computing (ICSC’16). 124--131.Google Scholar
- Yotam Evron, Pnina Soffer, and Anna Zamansky. 2017. Incorporating data inaccuracy considerations in process models. In Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer, 305--318.Google Scholar
- Clarissa Falge, Boris Otto, and Hubert Österle. 2012. Data quality requirements of collaborative business processes. In Proceedings of the 45th Hawaii International Conference on Systems Science (HICSS’12). IEEE, Los Alamitos, CA, 4316--4325. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Maria Grazia Fugini, Barbara Pernici, and Filippo Ramoni. 2009. Quality analysis of composed services through fault injection. Information Systems Frontiers 11, 3, 227--239. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Paul Glowalla and Ali Sunyaev. 2014. Process-driven data quality management: A critical review on the application of process modeling languages. Journal of Data and Information Quality 5, 1--2, 7:1--7:30. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Cecil Hastings, Frederick Mosteller, John W. Tukey, and Charles P. Winsor. 1947. Low moments for small samples: A comparative study of order statistics. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 18, 3, 413--426.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Geir Inge Hausvik. 2017. The role of information quality in healthcare organizations: A multi-disciplinary literature review. In Proceedings of the 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS’17).Google ScholarCross Ref
- Benjamin T. Hazen, Christopher A. Boone, Jeremy D. Ezell, and L. Allison Jones-Farmer. 2014. Data quality for data science, predictive analytics, and big data in supply chain management: An introduction to the problem and suggestions for research and applications. International Journal of Production Economics 154, 72--80.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Mitra Heravizadeh, Jan Mendling, and Michael Rosemann. 2009. Dimensions of business processes quality (QoBP). In Business Process Management Workshops. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing. Springer, 80--91.Google Scholar
- Mei-Chen Hsueh, Timothy K. Tsai, and Ravishankar K. Iyer. 1997. Fault injection techniques and tools. Computer 30, 4, 75--82. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Kyriakos Kritikos, Barbara Pernici, Pierluigi Plebani, Cinzia Cappiello, Marco Comuzzi, Salima Benbernou, Ivona Brandic, Attila Kertész, Michael Parkin, and Manuel Carro. 2013. A survey on service quality description. ACM Computing Surveys 46, 1, 1. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Yang W. Lee, Diane M. Strong, Beverly K. Kahn, and Richard Y. Wang. 2002. AIMQ: A methodology for information quality assessment. Information and Management 40, 2, 133--146. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Bina Lehmann. 2003. Is it worth the while? The relevance of qualitative information in credit rating. In Proceedings of the EFMA 2003 Helinski Meetings.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hema S. Meda, Anup K. Sen, and Amitava Bagchi. 2010. On detecting data flow errors in workflows. Journal of Data and Information Quality 2, 1, 4:1--4:31. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Helen-Tadesse Moges, Karel Dejaeger, Wilfried Lemahieu, and Bart Baesens. 2012. A total data quality management for credit risk: New insights and challenges. International Journal of Information Quality 3, 1, 1--27.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Martin Ofner, Boris Otto, and Hubert Österle. 2012. Integrating a data quality perspective into business process management. Business Process Management Journal 18, 6, 1036--1067.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Payam Hassany Shariat Panahy, Fatimah Sidi, Lilly Suriani Affendey, and Marzanah A. Jabar. 2014. The impact of data quality dimensions on business process improvement. In Proceedings of the 2014 4th World Congress on Information and Communication Technologies (WICT’14). 70--73.Google Scholar
- Leo Pipino, Yang W. Lee, and Richard Y. Wang. 2002. Data quality assessment. Communications of the ACM 45, 4, 211--218. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas C. Redman. 1996. Data Quality for the Information Age. Artech House. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas C. Redman. 1998. The impact of poor data quality on the typical enterprise. Communications of the ACM 41, 2, 79--82. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Thomas L. Saaty. 2001. Fundamentals of the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Springer, Netherlands, 15--35.Google Scholar
- Monica Scannapieco, Barbara Pernici, and Elizabeth M. Pierce. 2002. IP-UML: Towards a methodology for quality improvement based on the IP-MAP framework. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information Quality (IQ’02). 279--291.Google Scholar
- Rainer Schmidt, Wided Guédria, Ilia Bider, and Sérgio Guerreiro (Eds.). 2016. Enterprise, Business-Process and Information Systems Modeling: 17th International Conference, BPMDS 2016, 21st International Conference, EMMSAD 2016, Held at CAiSE 2016, Ljubljana, Slovenia, June 13-14, 2016, Proceedings. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Vol. 248. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Ganesan Shankaranarayanan, Richard Y. Wang, and Mostapha Ziad. 2000. IP-MAP: Representing the manufacture of an information product. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Quality (IQ’00). 1--16.Google Scholar
- Pnina Soffer. 2010. Mirror, Mirror on the Wall, Can I Count on You at All? Exploring Data Inaccuracy in Business Processes. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, Vol. 50. Springer, 14--25.Google Scholar
- Diane M. Strong, Yang W. Lee, and Richard Y. Wang. 1997a. 10 potholes in the road to information quality. Computer 30, 8, 38--46. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Diane M. Strong, Yang W. Lee, and Richard Y. Wang. 1997b. Data quality in context. Communications of the ACM 40, 5, 103--110. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Richard Y. Wang and Diane M. Strong. 1996. Beyond accuracy: What data quality means to data consumers. Journal of Management Information Systems 12, 4, 5--33. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Mathias Weske. 2012. Business Process Management: Concepts, Languages, Architectures. Springer. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Haissam Ziade, Rafic A. Ayoubi, and Raoul Velazco. 2004. A survey on fault injection techniques. International Arab Journal of Information Technology 1, 2, 171--186.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Validating Data Quality Actions in Scoring Processes
Recommendations
Requirements for Data Quality Metrics
Challenge Paper, Experience Paper and Research PaperData quality and especially the assessment of data quality have been intensively discussed in research and practice alike. To support an economically oriented management of data quality and decision making under uncertainty, it is essential to assess ...
Research on chinese hydrological data quality management
WISM'12: Proceedings of the 2012 international conference on Web Information Systems and MiningData quality has become increasingly important in information constructions and low data quality will influence the decision-making process related to design, operation, and management of hydrology application. Although many researches could be found ...
Data quality: cinderella at the software metrics ball?
WETSoM '11: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Emerging Trends in Software MetricsIn this keynote I explore what exactly do we mean by data quality, techniques to assess data quality and the very significant challenges that poor data quality can pose. I believe we neglect data quality at our peril since - whether we like it or not - ...
Comments