An MDM platform is live, yet conflict queues stall because no one is accountable for approving match and survivorship decisions. What role is missing?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Tools do not settle family arguments about who the real customer is—people with domain authority do. Those people are stewards. Without them, the conflict queue becomes a parking lot.
Full Explanation
An MDM platform that is live yet stalls on conflict queues because no one is accountable for approving match and survivorship decisions is missing data stewards who resolve conflicts and approve outcomes for the domain. Technology without stewardship does not finish civic mastering. Network administrators who reset VPN credentials when a match job fails are the wrong role for business identity decisions. Help-desk tier-1 agents who auto-approve every merge overnight fail segregation of duties and quality control. External marketers who set party thresholds from campaign click rates lack authority and fitness for resident master decisions. Exam caveat: stewards are mandatory operating roles for match/survivorship queues—platforms do not self-approve business identity. Operational check: name domain stewards, define queue SLAs, train on false-positive risk, and report aging conflict cases to the governance council. Do not declare municipal MDM “live” until steward coverage for the queue is staffed and measured. Keep verification evidence with the municipal runbook so audits can prove the chosen control was applied as designed and that rejected alternatives would have left city services exposed to the failure modes described above.