How important are the different styles of MDM architecture?

Learn how to compare different MDM architecture and learn about strengths and weaknesses of different styles such as persistent MDM hubs. Also discover how to communicate the value of MDM architecture to business users.

How important are the different styles of MDM architecture? In your book, you talk about persistent, registry and hybrid styles and some of the vendors are now using terminology like "co-existence" and "transactional." I'm not sure I understand all the differences here. Should I care?
Yes, you should care. Different MDM architectural styles have different strengths and weaknesses and you should be aware of what they are as they pertain to your functional requirements — (see my answer to the question about independent MDM cost estimates.) For instance, persistent MDM hubs physically store all the master data, including descriptive attributes. This could be overkill in environments that really need fast match and link capabilities. It's an important set of decisions.

But now that I've said that: don't care too much! Philosophical debates on the architectural styles can delay an otherwise on-track MDM plan. Also, don't burden your business users by trying to educate them on architectural nuances. In the end, what they want to know is why MDM is different from incumbent technology solutions, and how it will help them meet their — and the company's — goals.

Dig Deeper on MDM best practices