Collibra Governance Reviews

My company, a financial institution, decided to implement data governance for data analytics, et cetera. We designed an entire metadata management system using Collibra. Initially, we designed the metadata management, and then we enabled the receivership at the organization-level and also roles and responsibilities. After that, we created the lineage between the technical and business assets, and we automated the process of insertions and updates.

The enterprise data analytics and data science team are able to use the solution for analytics, utilizing the filtered finalized metadata from Collibra, which helps them acquire accurate details. 

There's also a lot of time-saving and they're able to use appropriate data sets. We have a bunch of data sets, however, we've been able to bring and filter, and finalize the proper data sets for our users. These data sets can be used on the data mining side, where, due to the accurate datasets acquired, appropriate data is available and better results are achieved. They're much more likely now to be able to provide good input to the company based on sound data. 

The data security lineage is the solution's most valuable aspect for our organization.

The product offers very good artificial intelligence capabilities.

The automation process is very strong.

The whole company can utilize the product. Once we ingest the metadata from the technical side and we enable the security, if any user wants to know anything from business asset information to which component it is been assigned where, et cetera, they can do so. They don't need to be technical or get a technician to pull the data for them. 

There is a lineage, which helps us to track down and drill down on details. It helps with data analytics and data science. 

Earlier we used to have a third party tool like MuleSoft for connectors. On the architecture side, they are introducing new features that allow us to phase out the third-party connector.

Collibra itself is building and providing some out of the box workflows. These features allow you to automate the process and strictly align the compliance of the company.

There are many new aspects of the solution, however, I haven't yet gone through the documentation to see if they really help solve for issues or not.

Many features have recently changed their appearance and I need to re-learn how they work.

Sometimes, if a client needs a specific customization, we cannot do it directly. The client needs to reach out to Collibra and request the customization.

The technical support is very poor.

I've been using the solution on a few projects now.

We don't have any concerns regarding stability. It doesn't crash or freeze. It doesn't have bugs or glitches. It's reliable and easy to use.

The solution scales well for the most part.

Collibra, as a SaaS model, defines every functionality. What happens is that when you are trying to deploy the solution to the customer, some customers may have a lack of knowledge or, because of compliance issues, they might not like the SaaS approach. That said, if a new customer wants to deploy governance but they do not have any knowledge about governance and they've chosen the Collibra, the solution will 95% meet their expectations. Customers that are well-versed in governance will also be mostly pleased in its capabilities.

The issue is that if you are a client and you want me to customize the product in a particular way, while the solution may not allow my team to make the customization, if the client directly reaches out to Collibra, no doubt they can make it happen for the client directly.

Technical support could use some improvements.

One of the concerns I have is the Collibra response time. For example, if you have an issue and you log the call with Collibra for support, the response from Collibra will take a long time. 

For every service request of support from Collibra, the response time is slow. For each of requests, as well they say the client needs to take coaching. They recommend the user to go for coaching. They need to change that support process. The answer can't always just be "learn more". 

Even with debugging issues, they respond properly. There are just a lot of problems with the way they handle calls from us. 

I have previously used different solutions. I've used, for example, Infomatica Axon. Out of all the products I've used, however, I really like Collibra.

There is another product called Alation, which is a very sophisticated product in the market of governance. Alation has more advanced features than Collibra. While it may be expensive, it might be worth the cost to get something more sophisticated. It's possible that Collibra might be updating to those more sophisticated features in the future. Cost-wise, compared to the Alation, Collibra is a cheaper product and much more economical. Also, on the web interface side, Collibra is more hands-on and it's easy for any customer to add and update. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. The Collibra product itself is pretty easy to implement and they have it designed in a way that can make the process pretty smooth. They've defined all of the processes so that they are easy step-by-step scenarios.

That said, the implementation of governance from a customer perspective is not so easy. That's not the product's fault. When we try to implement governance, a couple of stakeholders might agree, and others might not agree. There are internal differences. It depends on the customer.

With any new project, when you are launching it, you will face these roadblocks from the customer's side from time to time. From Collibra side, the product is very smooth and easy.

The deployment also depends on the customer, and therefore it can take anywhere from months to years to fully implement the process.

Typically, you need a minimum of three people to handle the deployment process. If a company's size is bigger, or their requirements are more intensive, you may need more.

Post-deployment, as well, you will need someone to handle some occasional maintenance on the product. How many individuals you may need will depend on the parameters. Governance is an ongoing process. It's not a set it and forget it scenario. Tweaks need to consistently be made.

As a consultant, I never really get into pricing and licensing. However, comparatively speaking, I'd say that it's not as expensive as other options. It's probably about average within the industry. It's not so expensive that companies can't afford it. 

I work on governance modules. I'm not related to Collibra. I'm an external consultant and a governance consultant. We adopt any technology which is related to governance. We prepare ourselves and we'll learn it and we'll get hands-on experience so that we have a good understanding of it for our clients.

My experience with Collibra has been amazing. I've been working on Collibra within a couple of fields and my journey through Collibra was very fabulous all the way across.

I'm using the SaaS version of the solution. It ensures we're always up to date on the latest features, etc.

I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate it at a seven out of ten. I'd rate it higher, however, the technical support is really quite bad.

We use the solution to organize data. The IT team has access to the data and knows where it is stored, but when it comes to legal compliances and various regulations, the business itself does not have control over where the data is stored and how it is stored. Typically, the business wants to have control over where the data is stored, the various data classifications, and data sensitivity. That is the main reason why we use Collibra Governance.

I appreciate the range of features it has. Based on the reviews of some of the other tools we use, we find that the other tools lack in certain areas. If I had to choose a comprehensive tool across all the fields of data governance, I would opt for Collibra Governance.

The most valuable feature is the Technical Lineage. The fact that you can trace the auditability of a particular field or attribute across various systems is very useful.

There are a few things that need improvement. From a usability perspective, customers usually find some areas of the solution a bit complex. It takes a long time for the customers to get used to the UI and the interface. Another thing that the customers complain about when they opt for Collibra is the pricing. There are fees for additional features which mess with the customers' overall budgets.

I've been using Collibra Governance for about two and a half years.

It is a very stable solution. I would give it a nine out of ten. It works very well compared to other solutions on the market.

The scalability of the solution is good. I give it an eight out of ten.

The response time of technical support is typically high.

Neutral

Nowadays, most customers are looking into Microsoft Stack, so we use Microsoft Purview as well, although Calibra Governance is our preferred choice since it's much more stable than Purview.

Up until now, Collibra Governance has been the market leader and is always the first one to add new features. Purview tries to bring out a lot of features as fast as possible, but those features are not very stable and have a lot of bugs. Purview has the upper hand when it comes to the usability of the app system. It is easier for customers to understand the feature list while using Purview. For example, after using both solutions for a few weeks, they usually have a better grasp of Purview than Callibra Governance.

Since it is a SaaS platform in a way, the solution is deployed on Collibra cloud. The deployment is pretty straightforward since Collibra deploys it on its own. It takes about a week to get the core of the system up and running. After, we configure it to fit the specific needs.

On a scale from one to ten, the simplicity of the setup would be an eight.

Collibra Governance's pricing is based on its features. You get what you pay for. There are other solutions that are cost-effective but lower quality. With Collibra, you get a fair-value product if you pay a bit more.

I would not recommend using the Big Bang approach with Collibra Governance. You should understand the bigger picture of what you want to do. Start off with a few systems and four small modules. Get feedback from the business and then continuously evolve it. It is better to have the implementation spread out over a one-year period than have it crammed down within three to six months while trying to implement everything at once.

I would say that Collibra Governance is suitable for small to medium businesses. 

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution's Data Stewardship part. We tried to explore the policy management piece, but we were unable to get through it. We haven't worked excessively on that. It was just some POCs or MVPs, but this is something that we would like to explore in the future. This is something that will be our future requirement in six to seven months down the line.

We use the solution's Data Stewardship part.

We are not able to ingest all the data in Collibra, and that's why we cannot do element-to-element level data tracking.

I have been using Collibra Governance for two years.

I rate the solution's initial setup as medium because it's not very difficult. We have to look at a few nuances from the infrastructure and performance perspectives. We have to consider whether we would have the leverage capabilities for that. So, all these things need to be considered from the engineering side.

Collibra Governance is an expensive solution.

Our current focus is more on the solution's stewardship, cataloging, and reference data features. The one feature of Collibra Governance we would like to explore is the automated tagging of PII data. We do deal with such kinds of data within our organization. It would be helpful if there were any videos available for us to go through because this is something that will help us in the near future.

We are not extensively using the solution's data lineage functionality because we are simply building over it. The only challenge for us is from the connective side. We are not able to ingest all the data in Collibra, and that's why we cannot do element-to-element level data tracking.

The major Broadlock would be the integration piece. If that is done, we'll be able to have all our data in the Collibra. The data lineage functionality is a really good feature, and we would really love to leverage it. The challenge is that the connectors are not available in the pipeline.

Collibra Governance is deployed on the cloud in our organization.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I have been working on Collibra for a data governance assignment. Along with that, we also use Ataccama for data quality purposes. It is a Collibra/Ataccama mixture that we use.

We would like to have out-of-the-box automation. We have leveraged some of the out-of-the-box workflows. Collibra does have the workflows such as the creation of business assets. We designed tools to tag the sensitivity information in Collibra and embedded scripts into the workflow. We then deployed that workflow so the user can upload a sheet with metadata and the tags will get tagged across those columns.

Collibra's lineage is a very powerful feature. We have integrated Collibra with Azure and ADLS storage and we create lineage diagrams using the two tools.

This solution does not have an out-of-the-box connector for the cloud platform. If a client does not want their data sent out of their own server, it will be very difficult to ensure this. You can install Collibra Jobserver and DGC on your machine, but you cannot install a newer solution. This is a restriction for us. 

We have been using this solution for one and a half years.

This is a stable solution. If you have data sources for which Collibra can provide an out-of-the-box connector, then it is stable. You can schedule your job to pull metadata or data out of your source system, with Collibra as a connector. However, if you have something out-of-the-box which Collibra does not support as a connector, that is a challenge. 

If you have Teradata or Oracle as a system, you can build that lineage into thw Collibra platform but if you want to build something on Azure, there is no direct way to do this because they don't support that.

This is a scalable solution. 

Collibra are very supportive. If you need anything, they have a customer support portal where you can raise a ticket and they reply immediately. 

Positive

Collibra does have its own university so when we started this assignment, we went through the courses. After that, it was quite easy to complete the setup. 

This is a very good tool and they have upgraded many features including an ADF connector and ADLS connector. You can write your own connector and customize it in the workflow.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

The solution that I had worked on was related to the technical implementation of metadata for capturing analytics. That said, that particular implementation missed the bus with using it for business use and getting a proper buy-in from the users.

We learned some lessons on a past implementation, and with the new implementation, we're going beyond the data catalog and looking at the OwlIQ, data quality, as well as data lineage. We're really selecting some of the best modules within Collibra's toolset.

Right now, we're just implementing it. We're still in the purchasing process, however, having experience with it, I would say a great feature is its usability on the engagement with enterprise functionality. The crowdsourcing and just making it very accessible is foundational. At the end of the day, it always comes down to terms. For example, we might be saying the same exact term, however, have completely different meanings. It brings to light just the nuances, especially within a larger enterprise organization, a global organization. In organizations of this size, we've realized just how different our terminology views are. It sheds a good light on this and helps clarify. 

The data lineage piece is very useful for us. The ability to understand data flows, where systems and changes originate, is great. A lot of time you might have something on paper that isn't necessarily working in real life. This product brings about the right visibility to have the right conversations between business and IT.

There is a good community setup around the solution that can provide insights. 

It's not necessarily a tool specific, however, with any sort of application, there's an investment as far as the way in which you need to use it. There is a lot of upfront work that has to be considered. That's just a common reality with any software implementation. There's a lot of pre-work. You just don't turn on the lights assume it's going to work exactly as you envisioned. There is input and planning required.

If anything, I would say that the licensing is one area that could get improved. We have basically three roles: an admin, an editor, and a view-only role. It is limiting. For example, we want view-only, however, if we want users to be able to approve workflows, they need editor rights. That makes sense, except it doesn't necessarily meet all the business cases we have. In some instances, you might just need proper approvals, and you are not necessarily asking anyone to edit things. Yet in order for them to approve, they must have edit rights.

The last implementation was very much focused more on IT and capturing more of the IT view of data and even data definitions really focused on data standards, such as how we're going to name the technical fields or how we're going to name the entities. This new deployment is really much more focused on not just the IT side but on the business side and the operational side. It's based more so around analytics and operational governance. I'm hoping to use more of the modules and have a better, more favorable opinion of the solution's capabilities. While overall I have the sense it's good, the last company I was with didn't have the right business partners and it really just became another IT tool, which wasn't helpful to the company as a whole.

The initial setup requires more of a trial and error approach and there isn't too much documentation available to help you figure things out. There needs to be more online support around the sharing of best practices. There are a lot of use cases and people like the tool. That said, you hear a lot of pain points around large amounts of data being ingested and creating backlogs of data that need to be cataloged and there's really no way to prioritize it. 

Ultimately, it's a tool that should help to coordinate a lot of efforts and it would be nice to be able to look at something and understand how another experience could be similar or you can get a lesson learned before you actually make it your own lesson to learn.

This is more of a data governance tool, not necessarily a centralized tool for data cleansing. However, with the data quality module, that's the next evolution that's possible. Looking at data quality issues and then ultimately not necessarily being able to correct them, there's a lost opportunity. Data changes all the time. We're measuring it all the time. It would be advantageous to build this into more of a data quality tool in which users could cleanse data that could go back to source systems. That said, that's encroaching on more of the MDM solution.

I've been using the solution for about two years or so at this point. 

It's largely a good, stable solution. This is not an MDM solution. From a governance standpoint, there are some things that Collibra does better than some of its competitors, however, there's always something about having multiple tools and getting users to accept the multiple tools. It would be great if they could partner with an MDM solution provider to give more of a seamless look and feel.

In the last implementation, I do not recall dealing with bugs or glitches. In this new implementation, it's still too early to tell. 

The scalability potential is all around the framework that's specific to the company. It'd be good to have some general best practices from Collibra's standpoint. That said, is scalable, however, first and foremost, you need to implement it and really look at how the tool is functioning out of the box before you put your own strategy on it. 

Many times though, projects as they go, you're really not afforded that freedom. You might have a specific use case and you're trying to get that implemented so you'll get a quick win from a governance standpoint and so you can continue to incrementally add value. It's a balance due to the fact that, as we're trying to provide a solution, governance is an investment for sure. While there's certainly scalability potential there are structures that need to be in place from a foundational standpoint for it to scale as you need it to.

In the last implementation, there were about 20 users on the product. In that case, it was not that extensively used. Doing a data warehouse migration from Cloudera to Azure, things were collected, however, what was missing was the business definitions and the scenario-based understanding. Due to the implementation the last time, it offered a very flat view of the data. You didn't understand how everything was related or how things were scenario-based, et cetera. You couldn't get a sense of how fields are ultimately connected, and the KPIs that they ultimately built didn't help with understanding. The intention was that it was going to be an enterprise data catalog and it missed that chance. 

I haven't been in touch with technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

The implementation is not that easy. All the sell sheets and everything makes it seem as though it's more structured. Here you have this catalog, however, in reality, you have to define the structure including the data that you're going to be collecting, how you're going to define it, what those workflows are, what the user groups are, et cetera. There's a whole change management initiative even beyond just turning it on. 

With any application, whether it's cloud-based, but especially if it's on-prem, there is a level of pre-work that needs to be done. It's not just a turn-it-on type of event. Overall, that's sometimes lost in the process.

Getting it installed and all that is pretty straightforward if you can get a system integrator, or maybe if you have the in-house knowledge, however, it's really the strategy that's behind it that makes for an easy or difficult rollout.

The community is pretty good, however, I haven't necessarily found anything that's like user groups that can help guide implementation. A lot of it is you make a mistake and you have to go back and try to remedy it. There is a lot of trial and error involved.

We handled the entire implementation ourselves, in-house. 

While I do not have a sense of the version number, I would say that we are not on the latest version of the solution at this time. 

I would advise new users looking at getting it implemented to really use the out-of-box features before you overlay your specific strategy on it. Upfront investigations and creating a repeatable framework of how this will ultimately operate are important to the success of the solution. One of the crucial early factors is to get this as part of an operating fabric within your company. There's a lot of pre-work and pre-thought that needs to be in place in that sense. Having well-engaged business folks as part of it will help with the level of success as well. This is not necessarily a big bang type of development and release. It's very incremental. You've got to think backward as far as the user experience - of how things are going to be searched and located - and bring that back to your IT process.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We use the product for classification based on the different regulations and compliance requirements.

The platform is customizable. In comparison, Informatica Axon has predefined facets. Meanwhile, Collibra lets us create custom assets. It helps us build a powerful workflow mechanism where there can be any stewardship, including issue management governing assets using policies, regulations, or business rules. They are integrated very well. It has a lot of connectors with different source systems and efficient cataloging features.

There could be more integration similar to Snowflake, for instance. They do support integration, but complete lineage is not possible. Certain implementations, including lineage maps, could be user-friendly. At the moment, there needs to be more lineage between data sources. It needs improvements in terms of attribute connectivity during data transformation.

We have been using Collibra Governance for seven or eight years.

It is a stable platform.

Collibra Governance is suitable for enterprise businesses. It is a SaaS product. Thus, the end users don’t have to maintain scalability or maintenance.

The technical support team is responsive.

Positive

I have worked with Informatica Axon and Data Catalog. In comparison, Collibra has better workflow management features. I recommend it for technical usage as well. However, Axon is more user-friendly for creating lineage diagrams. It has ready-to-use templates for deployment.

The initial setup process is complicated. However, once you get good training and understanding of the system, it is very straightforward. Some of the configurations require support. It takes around a week or two to complete all the configuration for the existing ecosystem.

For Informatica, we have to buy cataloging and governance separately. Meanwhile, Collibra offers one structure for both. We purchase its annual license. There is an extra cost for additional users.

I rate Collibra Governance an eight out of ten.

Our major use case for Collibra Governance involves maintaining lineage, as well as linking business terms and technical terms together. Then, our use revolves around linking policies with actual data, such that we can create data sharing policies within the tool, storing data and quality results.

I am currently working on about 10-12 projects with Collibra Governance using the latest cloud version. It is available on both cloud and on-premises, but currently all our solutions are moving to the cloud.

Workflows is the most valuable feature of Collibra because we will typically use an interface for it and we can customize it as per our needs.

It is also a very user-friendly tool which is easy to navigate and understand right from the start.

Many other tools like Collibra Governance give you the option to actually see the data in the tool, which is not an option in Collibra. If you compare it with Alation, which has the compose data option, you can see the data right there.

Perhaps this is a feature they could include in the future, although I'm not sure if it is in their roadmap or not, because it is just a governance tool for storing metadata, and not for connecting actual data. If they could include some type of data viewing functionality, however, I would appreciate it.

I've been using Collibra Governance for around six years.

It has been a stable tool since I started using it, which was around 2015. We have used their cloud version since about 2019 or so, making that two years of stable cloud use, while the on-premises version has also been stable. I believe it has been in the market from about 2008 and they have made many enhancements over time with regard to stability.

Since our version of Collibra is on the cloud and we essentially only use it as a metadata tool, the best way it can be extended is to increase the cloud database. This is all done by the Collibra team, however.

At the moment, I am working on between 10 and 12 projects with it, so in this sense I can call it scalable.

The tech support is good because they have a dedicated team who will be mobilized to help support you on the aspect that you are struggling with. Usually, you will get a response from a team member who has knowledge of the sort of routine you are asking about, and you will be talking with someone who has good knowledge of the tool. Of course, it may happen that the support team member is new to the job, but they will at least help guide you in the right direction.

There is also a support portal where you can browse and search for articles that explain what you need to know. If you can't find the information you're looking for, then you can just raise a ticket with their support. It is very easy.

Positive

It's a very user-friendly tool and easy to navigate right from the beginning.

We didn't actually need to install anything with the cloud version because the Collibra team maintains the installation and everything related to it. They simply give us a direct URL to access it and the admin team then manages all the other considerations. Usually, the customers buy one, two, or three instances at a time, including instances for QA and development, but the deployment process really depends on the size of the company.

Deployment in general is very easy because they have a built-in migration feature with which we can easily migrate data from one system to another in a direct manner. We can also simply make a complete backup of the environment and then just upload it to another system using the backup option.

Collibra provides you with a license based on the subscription model that you purchase.

I highly recommend this tool to users who want to see the lineage of their data, including technical lineage and business lineage. It is very easy to create lineage views with it, and it supports many technical lineages out of the box.

I would rate Collibra Governance an eight out of ten.

The primary use case for the solution is the governance of data dictionaries. It is useful for managing and classifying data on a large scale.

The product has significantly improved data governance by providing a centralized platform for managing data assets and ensuring consistent definitions. It has led to better data quality and more efficient compliance with regulatory requirements.

The product's most valuable features are cataloging and classification. 

They could simplify the platform's setup and design process. It requires significant IT involvement and expertise, which can be a barrier for smaller organizations.

We have been using Collibra Governance for approximately five years.

The product is stable and reliable. I rate the stability an eight.

The product is scalable, but the extent to which it scales effectively depends on how well it is designed and implemented. 

I rate the scalability an eight. 

The product's pricing is high, which its comprehensive features and capabilities may justify. However, the cost can be a consideration for smaller organizations or those with limited budgets.

As a data governance advisor, I evaluate various solutions based on their fit for the client's requirements. While I recommend this solution when it meets the organization's needs, there are more than one-size-fits-all solutions.

Integration with it can vary based on the client's IT landscape. For some organizations, integration is straightforward, while for others, it can be quite complex.

Its user interface is generally user-friendly, but it could benefit from some enhancements to improve ease of navigation and customization. While functional, a more intuitive design could help users operate the platform more efficiently.

Its performance can vary depending on how well it is configured and the scale at which it is deployed.

It has strong data privacy and security features, including robust encryption and access controls. It is designed to comply with various data protection regulations, crucial for maintaining data security.

It offers extensive customization, allowing tailored configurations to meet specific organizational needs. However, achieving this level of customization often requires considerable time and technical expertise.

It has strong user adoption and satisfaction due to its comprehensive features and capabilities. However, user experiences can vary based on the organization's specific needs and the solution's implementation.

I rate it a seven out of ten.