Evaluate Catalog, Lineage, and Data Quality Decisions

Evaluate Catalog, Lineage, and Data Quality Decisions

This applied lesson develops exam and operational judgment for evaluate catalog, lineage, and data quality decisions.

A data product needs business context and an accountable owner

Unified Catalog becomes useful when technical assets are organized into domains and products with purpose, ownership, approved use, access expectations, quality, terms, and lineage. Counting catalog assets is weaker than measuring whether priority products are findable, understandable, trustworthy, and usable.

Lineage supports impact analysis and explains transformation, but automated coverage can contain gaps. Validate important pipelines against real processing. A glossary improves shared language only when terms have stewards, scope, examples, and review—not when thousands of definitions are imported without adoption.

Remember that catalog access workflows do not silently replace source authorization. The source still controls access to underlying data.

Coverage metrics need a business denominator

A statement such as “95% governed” is incomplete until the eligible population and definition of governed are visible. Good metrics distinguish registered, scanned, classified, owner-assigned, lineage-covered, quality-monitored, and actively used assets.

When a report combines Data Map and Microsoft 365 telemetry, keep unlike denominators separate. A classified database column and a DLP-protected SharePoint file represent different control claims. Reconcile refresh, transformations, missing sources, and schema changes.

The Data Map and DLP limitations guide is a useful source for questions designed to expose these category errors.

Resources

• Official Microsoft reference for Evaluate Catalog, Lineage, and Data Quality Decisions — Use this Microsoft documentation to verify current capability behavior and prerequisites while preparing.