Canonical model debates keep delaying the first MDM go-live across every enterprise entity type. What delivery approach should the program favor?
Select an answer to reveal the explanation.
Short Explanation
Waiting for the perfect enterprise model is like redesigning the whole highway map before paving one street. Ship value domain by domain and refine the bigger model as you go.
Full Explanation
When canonical model debates keep delaying the first MDM go-live across every enterprise entity type, the program should iterate by domain—deliver usable masters for priority domains while the enterprise model evolves. Civic value arrives in increments, not after a perfect enterprise model freezes. Freezing all integration until one perfect canonical model finishes fails delivery and learning. Abandoning modeling so each source keeps uncontrolled keys forever fails the mastering goal. Replacing MDM with a one-time spreadsheet cleanse and declaring completion fails sustainability. Exam caveat: iterative domain delivery beats canonical-model paralysis on MDM exams. Operational check: select a priority domain, agree a minimal viable canonical slice, integrate consumers, and expand the model in later iterations. Record iteration gates in the municipal roadmap so architecture debates cannot indefinitely block resident-facing master improvements. 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. 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.