“We don’t need perfect data—just good enough to be defensible.” These words echo in boardrooms everywhere. But what happens when “good enough” data quality creates that awkward moment where HR and Finance show different headcount numbers to leadership?
Data quality management isn’t about perfection but about trust and credibility. The real cost of “good enough” becomes crystal clear when executives start asking why attrition numbers don’t match between departments or why compensation data looks inconsistent. I’ve seen firsthand how organizations change when they put a proper data quality framework in place. The gap between mediocre and excellent data shows up not just in accuracy, but in the team’s confidence.
In this piece, we’ll get into what makes quality data in HR, why companies settle for subpar information, and the practical steps to build a culture where excellence and not “good enough” sets the standard. You’ll learn about quality data’s key aspects and get useful frameworks that turn spreadsheet firefighting into systematic excellence.
This piece speaks to anyone who’s felt uncertain before showing people data to leadership or watched managers abandon dashboards they couldn’t trust. The shift from “defensible” to “dependable” data needs more than technical changes. It needs a complete cultural shift that starts with understanding what corner-cutting really costs.
Table of Contents
-
- The Uncomfortable Truth: ‘Good Enough’ Data Is a Decision
- What World-Class Looks Like (The Behaviors, Not the Buzzwords)
- Why ‘Good Enough’ Persists (And How to Dismantle It)
- The Culture-Change Playbook (In 6 Moves)
- From ‘Good Enough’ to Data Excellence
- Who Owns Data Quality in HR?
- HR Data Observability 101
- HR Data Quality Checklists: Getting Started
- Conclusion
- Key Takeaways
- FAQs
The Uncomfortable Truth: ‘Good Enough’ Data Is a Decision
Behind every case of questionable HR data lies a choice, not a technical limitation. Organizations don’t accidentally end up with “good enough” data. They choose it through active decisions or passive acceptance.
Why ‘Good Enough’ Became the Norm in HR
HR leaders often say they’ve settled for imperfect data because “We don’t have the budget for anything better.” Resource constraints top the list of reasons organizations won’t invest in proper data governance. The visible, revenue-generating projects usually win the budget battle against “invisible” data quality initiatives.
Leadership often misses data governance’s strategic value. Without executive support, HR data projects stay underfunded with minimal staff. One chief people officer put it well: “Before working with Talenode, most of our decisions came from anecdotal evidence and historical trends.” This shows how companies work without evidence-based insights.
Confusion about ownership hurts data quality projects badly. Most organizations face these challenges according to governance experts:
No assigned data stewards to maintain quality
Unclear communication about data handling
Little cross-functional teamwork
Poor training in data management
I saw this problem during a quarterly business review. HR and Finance showed different headcount numbers. The awkward silence that followed wasn’t about technology. It showed a basic governance gap – nobody owned the reconciliation process.
The Hidden Rework and Risk It Creates
“Just fix it for the board presentation” becomes a monthly ritual without proper data governance. This endless fixing creates an invisible burden on HR teams that nobody measures.
One HRIS director shared: “We spend about 40% of our time to check and fix data issues before any report goes to executives.” This hidden cost rarely shows up in budget talks. It wastes resources that could help strategic projects.
Bad data quality brings big risks. Companies using “good enough” data risk compliance violations. These can lead to penalties up to €20 million under GDPR rules. It also creates inefficiencies when teams make decisions using wrong information.
What looks like saving money actually costs more elsewhere. The heroic spreadsheet work needed to fix poor data quality often hides the real cost of weak governance.
How It Erodes Trust in People Data
The worst effect of “good enough” data is how fast it destroys trust. Once leaders doubt HR metrics, rebuilding their confidence becomes much harder.
Gore Mutual Insurance’s story shows this well. They used spreadsheets before and had consistency problems. Their change started when they saw how data mistrust hurt their strategic plans. Their Chief People Officer said: “We can’t grow and transform without our people.” They couldn’t manage those people without reliable data.
Trust erosion happens slowly at first, then speeds up. Small differences between reports appear first. Managers then create their own tracking systems. Finally, people politely listen to HR insights but never use them. Teams spend months building complex analytics dashboards that nobody uses because the data lacks credibility.
This trust problem creates a cycle: HR can’t prove its strategic value without reliable data. Without proven value, HR can’t get resources to improve data quality. Breaking this pattern means accepting that “good enough” data isn’t just a technical problem. It’s a strategic weakness that reduces HR’s credibility and effectiveness.
What World-Class Looks Like (The Behaviors, Not the Buzzwords)
Quality data emerges from specific behaviors that become routine in your HR organization. The difference between struggling with numbers and presenting data confidently before a crucial leadership meeting comes from systematic excellence.
Accuracy: Right Data, Right Person
Excellence in data quality begins with proper access to information. Role-Based Access Control (RBAC) grants permissions based on job responsibilities. Team members see only data relevant to their roles. This reduces unauthorized exposure risks by a lot.
A multinational firm showed remarkable results after implementing proper access controls. The company eliminated 90% of data discrepancies. They assigned owners to each data element. Their data stewards created processes that turned unclear responsibility into specific ownership.
Completeness: No Missing Fields or Gaps
Data quality excellence needs complete profiles of all critical elements. Many organizations accept incomplete records. The best operations focus on Critical Data Elements (CDEs), assets needed to comply, report, and operate.
Top teams refuse to accept gaps. They use:
Validation checks that prevent incomplete record creation
Weekly completeness reports highlighting problem areas
Automated notifications for owners of incomplete records
Recognition programs celebrating teams with highest completion rates
Teams must see completeness to achieve it. A CHRO displayed data completion rates by department on their executive dashboard. This turned completeness into a metric teams competed over.
Consistency: Same Definitions Across Systems
HR and Finance often argue about headcount numbers. Organizations with consistent data definitions avoid this problem. Teams need a unified data catalog as a single source of truth to overcome siloed operations.
Consistency requires teamwork. Leading organizations create dedicated teams. Data stewards, business analysts, and compliance professionals from different departments work together. These teams develop shared standards that apply to all systems.
Timeliness: Data That’s Up to Date and Usable
Excellence in data quality needs constant monitoring rather than occasional cleanup. Teams use automated validation routines and immediate alerts for data anomalies. Regular audits catch problems before they affect decisions.
Successful HR teams set clear service-level agreements about data freshness. They require all personnel changes to appear in systems within 24 hours. Dashboards show update frequency so everyone knows they work with current information.
Why ‘Good Enough’ Persists (And How to Dismantle It)
Every quarter, the same scene plays out: HR presents headcount numbers at the executive meeting that should match Finance’s records. Many organizations still accept “good enough” data quality as unavoidable, despite the constant pain of reconciliation. I’ve watched HR’s credibility crumble in these meetings when executives question why the numbers don’t line up.
Unclear Ownership and Accountability
Data quality suffers in most organizations because no one truly owns it. A data governance expert points out, “In the absence of clear ownership, roles, and shared priorities, data stewards, IT, and business units operate in silos.” This split weakens governance frameworks and limits how well they work.
A major transportation company struggled with employee data accuracy until they built a dedicated cross-functional team of data stewards, business analysts, and compliance professionals. Their success came from a leader who saw governance as a strategic goal—not just another compliance task.
Clear ownership matters because data governance affects every role differently. Executives want high-level metrics and ROI. Business users need easy access to clear data. Governance teams need flexible processes. These diverse needs don’t get proper attention without someone in charge.
Siloed Systems and Inconsistent Definitions
Siloed data remains a tough challenge, especially in bigger organizations. Data governance needs everyone’s effort, but departments often handle their information differently. This creates mixed definitions and competing “truths.”
The numbers that don’t match in meetings usually come from several issues:
Too much data to track effectively
Messy data from different sources
Old technology that won’t go away
Teams that don’t work together
Poor maintenance tools
So what looks like a technology problem is really about teamwork and standards. One consumer goods company I helped turned things around when they created a single source of truth in their data catalog. This gave them consistent tracking of where data came from, who owned it, and how people used it.
Weak Governance Routines and Lack of Visibility
Organizations with data owners often miss the weekly checks needed for lasting success. Governance becomes a one-time project instead of an ongoing practice without regular monitoring and reinforcement.
Poor monitoring leads to worse data quality – I’ve seen it happen. The best organizations run constant validation checks and treat governance as part of their daily work.
These problems show up as:
Missing detailed change management plans
Not adapting quickly to new needs
Weak systems for growing governance
No clear view of quality measurements
Fixes: Assign Roles, Set Standards, and Create a Weekly Rhythm
Better data quality needs specific, repeatable actions:
Appoint purposeful cross-functional leadership – Build a dedicated team with clear governance duties. Include people from different parts of the organization who bring various views.
Implement non-invasive data governance – Robert Seiner’s governance model helps by making business units own the process and fitting governance into existing jobs instead of adding extra work.
Frame governance as an enabler, not an obstacle – Show how good governance makes analytics better, speeds up access to trusted data, and protects sensitive information through practical training for different teams.
Create weekly data quality rhythms – Set up regular monitoring with clear metrics for KPIs. Celebrate fixes publicly and look for root causes instead of pointing fingers.
Automate validation where possible – Modern data catalogs can check quality, track data movement, and enforce policies automatically. This means less manual work and more consistent results.
Excellence isn’t about being perfect but being reliable. The best organizations don’t succeed because they have better technology or talent but they win because of their governance culture. HR teams can stop defending questionable numbers and start driving strategic decisions with trusted insights by fixing these basic problems.
The Culture-Change Playbook (In 6 Moves)
Data quality culture doesn’t come from big announcements as it grows from daily habits that become “how we do things here.” After years of helping HR teams build better relationships with data, I’ve discovered six ways to make data quality real instead of just an aspiration.
1. Create a Metrics Contract for Key KPI’s
A financial services firm I worked with brings their HRIS and Finance teams together every Monday morning. They spend 30 minutes reviewing their “metrics contract”, a documented agreement that spells out how they define, calculate, and confirm each critical HR metric. This contract includes:
Precise calculation formulas for headcount, attrition, and compensation metrics
Clear ownership assignments for each data element
Validation thresholds that trigger alerts
Resolution protocols when discrepancies appear
This simple ritual put an end to the monthly “headcount showdown” that used to plague executive meetings. The metrics contract serves as more than documentation—it builds mutual accountability through a social agreement.
2. Celebrate Data Fixes Publicly
Data quality rarely improves when organizations treat it as “invisible maintenance work.” Teams create positive reinforcement loops by recognizing data improvements openly.
A large retail organization revolutionized their data culture by introducing a monthly “Data Hero” award during all-hands meetings. The recognition felt strange at first because shouldn’t clean data be expected? These celebrations gradually changed how people viewed quality data and its role in making better decisions about staffing, development, and retention.
3. Move from Blame to Root Cause Analysis
Data errors will happen. The culture shows in what happens next. Low-trust environments point fingers, while high-performance cultures investigate systematically.
A manufacturing client introduced a “blameless post-mortem” process for data discrepancies that affected decisions. They focused on improving systems, definitions, and processes instead of finding who made mistakes. This approach turned errors into opportunities to learn and created psychological safety around data quality discussions.
4. Upskill Teams and Model Leadership Behavior
Cultural change needs both skills and examples. Smart organizations provide role-specific data literacy training while their leaders demonstrate data excellence behaviors.
Executives at a healthcare organization join quarterly “data quality walk-throughs” to review dashboards with their teams. They ask about sources, validation methods, and confidence levels. This practice shows that quality matters throughout the organization.
5. Automate to Reduce Manual Work
Quality data needs less human effort to be sustainable. Organizations with mature data cultures invest in automation that watches quality continuously.
Governance experts say proper data quality tools provide ongoing monitoring to help organizations understand their data and its location. These systems profile quality, trace lineage, and enforce policies automatically. Teams spend less time on manual validation and get more consistent results.
6. Track Adoption and Trust Metrics
People using data to make decisions proves that data culture has changed. The best organizations measure both system adoption and trust indicators.
A retail company I advised tracks “time to insight”—how fast managers can use HR data without help. They also run quarterly surveys about confidence levels, asking stakeholders to rate their trust in different data areas. These metrics warn about potential quality issues before they affect decisions.
These six approaches work together to make quality the norm rather than a surprise. The change takes time, but teams that stick to these practices build the data foundation that strategic HR needs.
From ‘Good Enough’ to Data Excellence
Someone in your organization spends every Monday morning fixing data problems—a Band-Aid approach that defines “good enough” data cultures. The difference between data struggles and mastery doesn’t depend on resources. It comes down to creating fundamentally different operating models.
Focus 1: Manual Patches, Unclear Owners, Metric Debates
Organizations stuck in the “good enough” mindset show three telling patterns off the top of my head:
Spreadsheet heroics become normalized as the first red flag. That desperate rush before board meetings isn’t just occasional but it’s business as usual. One HRIS director told me their team spends about 40% of time proving right and fixing data problems before sending reports to executives. This hidden rework taxes HR teams heavily while hiding the true cost of underinvestment.
Ownership stays unclear without assigned data stewards who take responsibility for maintenance. This lack of clear responsibility creates a governance gap where quality becomes nobody’s priority. Governance experts point out that “Organizations lack dedicated data champions. In the absence of clear ownership, roles, and shared priorities, data stewards, IT, and business units operate in silos.”
Metric debates waste valuable meeting time as departments show conflicting numbers. An executive meeting went off track when HR and Finance showed headcount figures that differed by 7%. The team took months to rebuild their lost credibility.
Teams often say, “We don’t need perfect data, just defensible numbers.” Yet defensibility needs standards, owners, and repeatability elements that “good enough” cultures lack.
Focus 2: Defined Owners, Clear Definitions, Continuous Monitoring
Organizations that achieve data excellence take systematic approaches with three core elements:
Clear ownership structures are the foundations. This means building what experts call “purposeful, cross-functional governance leadership” through dedicated teams of data stewards, business analysts, and compliance professionals. Each Critical Data Element (CDE) has someone accountable for its accuracy.
Consistent definitions across systems stop most data debates. A unified data catalog serves as connective tissue across fragmented systems. One expert explains, “By unifying metadata, it provides single-point visibility into enterprise datasets, enabling users to search, understand, and cooperate with full context.”
Continuous monitoring beats reactive firefighting. Excellence means moving from periodic cleanup to proactive maintenance through automated validation routines and live alerts for data anomalies. This creates what Robert Seiner calls “non-invasive data governance”, embedding quality into existing workflows instead of adding burdens.
Your organization can replace spreadsheet heroics with a repeatable data excellence operating system. Book a Talenode demo to see how continuous validation and governance workflows make “good enough” disappear.
This transformation takes time, but organizations that follow these practices build stronger foundations for strategic HR. Companies that move from reactive to proactive data management see three consistent results: higher trust in HR insights, faster decision-making, and they spend less time on manual corrections.
Strategic partners differ from struggling HR teams through governance discipline, not technical sophistication. Excellence means reliability achieved through intention, ownership, and consistent routines.
Who Owns Data Quality in HR?
A CEO asks why turnover numbers don’t match across departments—who takes responsibility for that data discrepancy? The hard truth reveals that no one clearly owns HR data quality in most organizations, yet everyone bears the burden of its failures.
The Role of HR, It, and Business Leaders
“IT owns the data” is an outdated view that creates accountability gaps and undermines data excellence. Quality HR data governance needs three distinct but complementary roles:
HR teams must own the data they generate and use daily. They need to define business requirements, set data standards, and ensure data serves strategic objectives. Technical systems may work perfectly without HR’s active stewardship but fail to deliver meaningful insights.
IT teams provide strong infrastructure, technical expertise, and systems integration capabilities. Their focus stays on enabling secure, available platforms rather than determining quality data from a business view.
Business leaders act as both stakeholders and enforcers. Executives signal quality’s importance at every level when they consistently ask about data sources, validation methods, and confidence levels during presentations.
A governance expert explains that “Data governance is an organization-wide effort that relies on many players, each with specific roles and responsibilities.” Organizations achieve success by creating dedicated governance teams that bridge departmental boundaries.
Why Shared Ownership Matters
Data silos remain the biggest barriers to data quality. Facts often don’t match due to multiple factors:
Tracking massive data volumes across fragmented systems becomes difficult
Departments define key metrics differently
Technology depends on legacy systems
Teams lack cross-functional collaboration
These problems continue without shared ownership. An expert points out that “In the absence of clear ownership, roles, and shared priorities, data stewards, IT, and business units operate in silos. This fragmentation weakens governance frameworks and limits their effectiveness.”
Shared ownership works. Gore Mutual Insurance changed their approach by implementing a people analytics platform that arranged HR data across departments. Their Chief People Officer said this alignment “transformed how we make decisions—from hiring to promoting—and has lifted the status of the HR team.”
How to Assign and Support Data Stewards
Organizations must establish formal data stewardship roles to build lasting data quality. These stewards form the human foundations that support governance frameworks.
Effective data steward programs have:
Clear role definition – Documented responsibilities, time commitments, and decision-making authority
Formal recognition – Stewardship acknowledgment in performance reviews and career development discussions
Capability building – Training in technical skills and cross-functional collaboration
Executive sponsorship – Visible support from leadership for stewards
Robert Seiner’s “non-invasive data governance model” offers the most effective approach. This model embeds quality into existing responsibilities instead of creating extra work. Business ownership takes priority by activating people through recognition of their current roles in managing data.
Data quality ownership doesn’t need new positions—it needs formal accountability for existing informal roles. Organizations change data quality from an occasional priority to a continuous practice by creating explicit ownership structures.
HR Data Observability 101
A red notification appears on your dashboard: “30% of manager fields empty in new hire records.” Organizations with data observability take immediate action on such alerts instead of ignoring them. This key difference shows why data observability matters to HR leaders who care about data quality.
What is Data Observability?
Data observability marks a radical change from reactive firefighting to proactive monitoring. Traditional data management focuses on periodic cleanup, but observability gives you constant insight into your HR data’s health, lineage, and quality.
Data observability works as the beating heart of effective governance. It watches data throughout its lifecycle and spots anomalies, inconsistencies, and quality issues before they grow into bigger problems. This constant monitoring creates what governance experts call “non-invasive data governance.” Quality checks become part of workflows rather than extra tasks.
How It Helps Detect and Fix Issues Early
Early intervention makes data observability powerful. Data errors often stay hidden until that awkward moment in the executive meeting when HR and Finance show different headcount numbers.
Good observability lets systems flag issues automatically like:
Incomplete employee records before they affect reporting
Inconsistent data definitions across systems
Unusual patterns that might indicate data entry errors
Policy violations that could create compliance risks
This early detection changes how teams work. One HRIS director noted, “Before implementing observability, we discovered problems when executives complained. Now we identify and fix 90% of issues before anyone outside our team notices.”
Tools and Practices for Continuous Monitoring
You need both tools and practices for effective data observability. Modern data catalogs provide the foundation and work as connective tissue across fragmented systems. These catalogs track metadata, check quality, trace lineage, and enforce policies automatically. Users can find, trust, and use data with confidence.
Successful teams use what experts call “continuous monitoring.” This helps organizations know what data exists and where to find it. Regular audits become routine, which creates visibility and leads to better decisions while reducing risk.
Book a Talenode demo to replace spreadsheet heroics with a repeatable data excellence operating system. See how continuous validation and governance workflows eliminate “good enough.”
Analytics suites added to catalog ecosystems give leaders the visibility they need to track adoption and show results. Leaders can arrange data strategy with business goals and prove ROI at each stage. Data quality moves from a wish to an operational reality.
HR Data Quality Checklists: Getting Started
“I need a checklist to fix this mess,” the HRIS director sighed after another executive meeting where headcount numbers sparked debate. Checklists do more than organize tasks – they become cultural artifacts that weave excellence into daily operations.
Step-By-Step Guide to Assess and Improve Data Quality
Inventory your critical data elements – The essential HR data assets needed for compliance, reporting, and operations should be identified and prioritized.
Assign clear ownership – Data stewards must take responsibility for specific data domains.
Define quality standards – Clear metrics for accuracy, completeness, consistency, and timeliness need to be set.
Implement proper access controls – Role-based permissions should limit data exposure while giving necessary access.
Profile your current data quality – Your standards need baseline assessments.
Create data documentation – Key metrics need clear definitions and calculation methods.
Automate validation routines – Continuous monitoring helps catch issues early.
Encrypt sensitive information – Confidential data needs appropriate security measures.
How to Use Checklists for Ongoing Assurance
The momentum stays strong when checklists become part of weekly routines through:
Data audits within governance procedures
HR and Finance teams meeting to collaborate
Teams working with people data need regular training
Linking Checklist Items to Business Outcomes
Each checklist item connects to real benefits. Accurate headcount data leads to precise workforce planning. Clear definitions eliminate time wasted on reconciliation debates. A Chief Data Officer put it well: “Governance isn’t just a compliance exercise—it’s a value driver that improves data quality, reduces risk, and accelerates decision-making.”
Conclusion
The quarterly spreadsheet scramble before executive meetings reveals a lot about your data culture. Everyone knows this scene – HR and Finance present different headcount numbers while anxiety builds in the room. This goes beyond a mere technical issue and shows a choice between settling for “good enough” or striving for excellence.
My career has shown me how organizations change when they move from defensive data practices to proactive governance. A manufacturing client made this switch after a tough board meeting. Their CHRO’s attrition figures didn’t match Finance’s calculations at all. Instead of quick fixes, they set up weekly data quality reviews with clear ownership. Six months later, their executive team focused on strategic decisions because they didn’t waste time arguing about numbers.
Data quality changes how teams work with HR insights. Teams with proper governance see something amazing – people start using dashboards more as trust builds up. A retail client’s numbers showed that manager self-service grew 300% in just months after they added data verification workflows. People naturally gravitate to information they trust.
Leadership must model new behaviors to transform the culture. CHROs send clear signals that excellence matters when they join data quality reviews, publicly praise improvements, and ask detailed questions about sources. A healthcare executive made this point clear during a quarterly review. They asked everyone three questions: “Who owns this data? How recently was it verified? What confidence level do we have in these numbers?” These questions became standard practice throughout their organization.
“We don’t need perfect data, just good enough to be defensible” might sound practical until you realize true defensibility needs standards, owners, and repeatability – these are the foundations of excellence. The difference between struggling and thriving organizations isn’t about technology or budget. It comes down to their governance discipline and cultural expectations.
Excellence in data quality needs specific, repeatable practices: clear ownership assignments, consistent definitions across systems, automated verification routines, and weekly governance rhythms. Organizations that welcome these practices learn that excellence isn’t about perfection – it’s about reliability through intention and discipline.
Your experience from “good enough” to excellence begins with one step: deciding that data quality deserves proper attention, resources, and cultural support. This transformation takes time, but teams that follow these practices build stronger foundations for strategic HR.
The difference between an HR function that always defends its numbers and one that drives strategic decisions with trusted insights isn’t luck – it’s systematic excellence by design.
Key Takeaways
HR leaders must recognize that “good enough” data quality is a strategic liability that undermines credibility and wastes resources on constant manual fixes.
• “Good enough” data creates hidden costs: Organizations spend up to 40% of HR time manually fixing data issues before executive presentations, creating invisible rework taxes.
• Data quality requires clear ownership: Assign specific data stewards for each critical element and establish cross-functional governance teams to eliminate accountability gaps.
• Excellence means systematic behaviors, not perfection: Implement weekly data quality reviews, automated validation routines, and consistent definitions across all systems.
• Cultural transformation starts with leadership: Executives must model data excellence by asking about sources, validation methods, and confidence levels during presentations.
• Trust drives adoption: Teams gravitate toward reliable data and abandon questionable dashboards—building trust through governance increases manager self-service by 300%.
The path from defensive data practices to strategic HR influence requires replacing spreadsheet heroics with disciplined governance routines. Organizations that establish clear ownership, consistent definitions, and continuous monitoring transform data quality from aspiration to operational reality, enabling confident decision-making rather than constant reconciliation debates.
FAQs
Q1. Why Is “Good Enough” Data Quality Problematic for HR?
“Good enough” data quality creates hidden costs, wastes resources on manual fixes, and undermines HR’s credibility. It can lead to conflicting numbers in reports, erode trust in HR insights, and hinder strategic decision-making.
Q2. How Can HR Leaders Improve Data Quality in Their Organizations?
HR leaders can improve data quality by assigning clear ownership of data elements, implementing consistent definitions across systems, establishing automated validation routines, and creating weekly data quality review rhythms. They should also focus on building a culture that values data excellence.
Q3. What Role Does Leadership Play in Improving HR Data Quality?
Leadership plays a crucial role by modeling data excellence behaviors, participating in data quality reviews, celebrating improvements publicly, and consistently asking probing questions about data sources, validation methods, and confidence levels during presentations.
Q4. What Is Data Observability and Why Is It Important for HR?
Data observability is the practice of continuously monitoring data health, lineage, and quality throughout its lifecycle. It’s important for HR because it enables proactive detection and resolution of data issues before they impact decision-making or reporting accuracy.
Q5. How Can Organizations Measure the Impact of Improved Data Quality?
Organizations can measure the impact of improved data quality by tracking metrics such as time saved on manual data fixes, increased adoption rates of HR dashboards and self-service tools, reduced discrepancies in reports, and improved confidence levels in HR data among stakeholders.