Companies have increasingly depended upon cloud platforms to store, process, and analyze data as these systems enable users to track customer behavior, automate decision-making, and even extract valuable business insights from a single interface. Moreover, these systems also allow companies to forecast business trends and optimize business operations.
However, decentralizing operations and relying on third-party vendors does increase operational efficiency, but at the cost of security and flexibility. As such, organizations are more exposed to security risks, and their control over the data decreases. Using multiple vendor services means that IT resources are no longer manageable internally.
This makes one question: Are centralized platforms taking too much to grant operational convenience? A thought-provoking question arises: are companies and users getting equal benefits, or is business intelligence and data governance power splitting in favor of a central figure?
The Promise and Pitfalls of Centralized Platforms
Centralized data platforms were constructed with the initiative to blend information from various departments and applications. These platforms enable structures to be developed and implemented within organizations. With these structures in place, decision-makers can access their reports, analysts can track trends, and developers can integrate insights into their applications.
These platforms consolidate fragmented data sources, making it easier and quicker to study data analytics. Businesses benefit from this because they have a “single source of truth” where all the data they need is stored in one location.
However, the challenges that have been introduced have also proven to be detrimental to these platforms’ effectiveness.
Long Cycle Times
As data increases, cycle times have begun to grow. On the contrary, installing new data does take longer, which can result in slower and more inefficient decision-making.
For this reason, organizations struggle to be agile in the opportunistic and volatile market changes they face, as they must wait for innumerable updates before being able to act.
High Costs
Several proprietary technologies rely on privately owned systems, which means that platforms have to spend on licensing fees, pay for data space, and maintenance. As these accumulate, operational costs begin to increase. In addition, as the data increases in volume, companies have no choice but to scale their infrastructure, which further increases their operating expenses.
Legacy Lock-In
When an organization moves toward a centralized structure, it becomes impossible to switch back. The existing platform provides rules, business processes, integrations, and security features that are all tailored to the system. Changing the system consumes resources, and this makes the vast majority of companies hold on to outdated systems instead of moving toward more efficient solutions.
These developments raise the question of whether centralized platforms actually improve business productivity or have become a roadblock to efficiency and control in the workplace.
Decentralized Services Beyond Data
Other services, such as finance, online communication, and even gaming, are being decentralized and are also adopting a shift from data management. There is a gradual decrease in dependency on central authority figures.
Using cryptocurrencies is in direct conflict with traditional banking methods as they eliminate any middlemen facilitating the transaction and putting the money in the bank. Users are able to share information among themselves, all without the enforcement of a supervisor.
The gaming industry is certainly not at the back of the queue when it comes to experiencing shifts. Many platforms have and still demand users to register detailed, real identity-linked accounts, as well as KYC verification for players to be able to play their favorite games. Some services do attempt to value the user’s privacy by collecting minimal amounts of data. The survey shows that many gamers do not feel secure when it comes to sharing personal information, and they are looking for no verification casinos that do not seek KYC policies, where users are engaged without the necessity to submit core identity details.
Decentralization: A Solution to Shift Control
Data Mesh allows for self-managed data units to be separated from centralized platforms. Organizations no longer have to consolidate all their data into one location. Now, individual teams who manage their data are given that responsibility. Departments are now able to process, store, and analyze their data in a way that best serves their needs.
When organizations opt for a decentralized form of data management, they alleviate obstacles. Teams are no longer dependent on authorities to provide access to needed resources. The pace of processing and the speed of decisions increase significantly.
Data Mesh allows for more adaptability in an organization. As business requirements change, teams are able to alter their data practices without causing a disruption to the entire system. Moreover, new silos can be integrated without existing infrastructure needing modification.
A healthcare provider was able to respond to the COVID-19 pandemic by deploying new data products across silos in a matter of days by leveraging Data Mesh. Real-time patient data needed to be predicted to allocate resources and make predictions. With a decentralized approach, the provider was able to deploy new products and implement trend analysis, model updating, and treatment plan shifting. The data processing speed of traditional systems would have greatly increased the time taken to process the same information.
Concluding Thoughts: What Will The Future Bring?
Though these shifts enable more authority for the people, maximal efficiency can still only be achieved through centralized systems. To run any business on a notable scale, well-defined and organized data sets are needed; therefore, privacy is compromised for convenience on a day-to-day basis. It is possible that partial autonomy alongside centralized systems is the answer.
Companies must evaluate whether to adopt frameworks that encourage privacy or rely on legislative bodies to make the change. While some organizations are trying to minimize data gathering while being more transparent, others are continuing with centralized systems despite the negative feedback.
Companies that choose to enact laws on their operations will bear the consequences of modifying the rules regarding data consumption. Other businesses that promote gathering information through the public will be much better off if they decide to accept these alternatives.
