Master Data Governance Without the Theater

In last week’s post, “How to Build a Data Stewardship Framework“, we broke governance down into its most practical form: stewardship. We looked at the four essential roles: owners, stewards, engineers, and governance leads, and how assigning real names to real tasks turns abstract policy into concrete outcomes. Good stewardship, we saw, isn’t about more meetings or fancier titles. It’s about giving the right people visibility, tools, and the authority to act.

This week, we’re cutting through the ceremony most people associate with data governance to focus on what actually matters: how to govern master data without turning it into theater. You’ll learn how to build trust, define real accountability, and make governance a daily practice – not a once-a-quarter performance.

The Problem with Theatrical Governance

Too many data governance programs look polished in presentations but fall apart in real life.

You get policies no one follows.

Councils that meet but never decide.

Diagrams that impress executives but don’t survive first contact with day-to-day business.

The intent is right. Governance does matter. But most models create friction instead of value. They slow down real work, obscure accountability, and discourage people from following the rules because the “right way” is too painful to use.

You don’t need more rules.

You need governance that works where people actually work.

Why Most Data Governance Programs Fail

Governance That Looks Good but Doesn’t Work

Theater happens when governance is treated like a stage show; lots of effort for appearance, little substance in practice.

• Fancy charters exist, but no one reads them.
• Data councils meet but kick decisions down the road.
• Approval chains look robust, but everyone quietly avoids them.

The Cost of Over-Complicated Governance

When rules are so rigid or time-consuming that people find workarounds, governance becomes the opposite of what it should be. Instead of trust and clarity, you get:

• Shadow processes outside official workflows
• Inconsistent definitions across business units
• A widening gap between what governance claims and how work actually gets done

Bottom line: If governance slows down the business, the business will find ways around it.

What Good Data Governance Should Do

Clarity Over Complexity

Governance isn’t about writing 30-page playbooks or inventing titles like “Chief Data Shepherd.” It’s about clarity:

• Who decides how key data should be used?
• Who can change it, and under what conditions?
• What happens when data conflicts arise?

How Governance Adds Business Value

Done well, a lean governance framework:

• Aligns definitions across teams
• Reduces rework caused by ambiguity
• Speeds up decision-making instead of stalling it
• Builds confidence that data is trustworthy

If your governance model makes people want to bypass it, it’s broken.

Signs of Governance Theater

You might be doing governance theater if:

• Your “governance council” meets but never makes binding decisions
• Policies exist only in PDFs stored on SharePoint, not in the tools people use
• Workflows are so clunky that users routinely bypass them
• Approvals require five names but no one feels truly accountable
• Data quality reports highlight issues, but no one fixes them

That’s not governance. That’s pretending.

What Lean, Real Governance Looks Like

Clear Decision-Making with Named Owners

Every governed domain or field should have a person, not just a role, who owns decisions. Accountability is clearer when you can name someone, not just point to a committee.

Policies That Match Real Business Use

Policies should reflect how data is actually used. Skip hypotheticals. Govern the data that directly impacts operations, compliance, or revenue.

• Example: Don’t waste effort governing “customer language preference” if no system uses it.

Minimal Workflows That Reduce Friction

Start with the simplest workflow possible and add steps only when risk demands it.

• Example:
  • Steward enters new vendor details
  • Owner reviews and approves
  • Done in 1 day, not 3 weeks

Feedback Loops to Spot Issues Early

Governance should evolve. Ask monthly: Where are people bypassing workflows? Which rules add friction without value?

• If 40% of requests skip the process, that’s not failure. It’s feedback.

Embedding Governance into Daily Tools

The best governance is nearly invisible.

• If stewards must dig through PDFs and email chains, they won’t follow the process.
• If the rules live in the same portal they already use, compliance happens naturally.

Example: New Product Setup

❌ Governance Theater

• Submit a long form
• Wait for reviews by five different teams
• Delay until the monthly governance council meets
• SLA: 3 weeks
• Chaos when deadlines slip

✅ Lean Governance

• Rules built directly into the product setup portal
• Steward does the initial review
• Owner approves if checks pass
• SLA: 2 business days
• Smooth, fast, and reliable

These approaches have the same goals but radically different outcomes.

Five Governance Questions Every Team Should Ask

During your next review, ask:

1. Who approves changes to this data? Can you name them?
2. Are our rules embedded in tools, or just sitting in a PDF?
3. How often do people bypass governance processes?
4. What’s the average approval time for a critical change?
5. Do stewards and owners clearly know their accountabilities?

If you can’t answer these, your governance model may be more theater than strategy.

Final Thought: Governance Should Help You Move Faster

Good governance doesn’t slow you down. It speeds up the right work.

• No more 12-step approvals.
• No more fake authority.
• No more busywork disguised as “structure.”

Instead, you get lean, smart governance that:

• Removes confusion
• Builds trust
• Supports the real work of the business

That’s master data governance without the theater.