IT Leaders Must Establish a Network Data Architecture Practice

Shamus McGillicuddy

Network data quality and authority have been problems for a very long time, and IT organizations can no longer afford to ignore the issue. Enterprise Management Associates (EMA) recommends that CIOs establish a network data architecture team and give it the budget and authority needed to improve the data that IT organizations rely on for day-to-day network operations.

When managing a network, an IT organization typically deals with countless classes of network data. This data can be organized into two general categories: intent data and state data. Intent data is a record of how a network should operate, and state data is proof of how the network is operating. So much of modern network operations is about discovering disagreements between intent and state. Answering that question is difficult when the data is scattered and its quality and authority are questionable.

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do.

Here are the numbers:

Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network. 

Additionally, the issue of network data quality stretches beyond network operations. Many other parts of a company rely on network data for critical operations. Cybersecurity teams require network data for incident detection and investigations. DevOps and cloud teams consume network data when making network-related changes to their environments or troubleshooting application issues. Compliance teams have rigorous data requirements when they conduct network audits.

The Network Intent Problem

The fact that only 45% of enterprises are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth points to a major gap in network intent data quality.

Network intent data is critical to all aspects of operations, from designing and deploying networks and implementing changes to responding to network incidents. Examples of intent data include configuration standards, IP address space, network inventory information, connectivity and topology, and security policies.

Engineers reference intent data for a variety of operations. When they make a change, they need to ensure that the change will comply with intent. When they troubleshoot a problem, they need to gather intent data for the problem domain, which helps them identify whether any drift from intent is the root cause of a fault or performance issue.

Good network intent data streamlines manual operations, but it also enables network automation. For example, automation tools with programmatic access to a network source of truth can instantly pull all the data they need to create a new configuration. Additionally, intent data is the foundation of agentic network operations. AI needs to understand how a network should operate before it does anything else.

Network engineers often tell me that intent data is scattered across multiple siloed systems of record, and the quality and authority of those systems are often unclear. For instance, network inventory data might live in two or three network controllers. IP address space often resides in a spreadsheet. And an organization might have two systems of record for config standards. A tier 1 engineer who is working a trouble ticket will struggle to gather info across such an environment.

The Network Observability Data Problem

Lack of trust in network observability data points to a variety of tool problems that are undermining how network teams monitor and troubleshoot their networks. Network observability data is usually siloed and the quality is uneven. Data silos and quality issues lead to visibility gaps, where network operators are blind to emerging problems until disaster strikes.

A company might have one tool for collecting device metrics, another for monitoring flows, a third for collecting and analyzing packets, a fourth for synthetic traffic analysis, and a fifth for detecting config changes. Many tool vendors have proprietary methods for managing data, which makes it difficult for IT organizations to integrate and correlate data across tools. This forces operators to context-switch from one tool to another as they work a problem, and this kills efficiency.

Beyond silos, EMA's recent research found that network operators primarily face four data quality issues with their observability tools. First, security risk is a challenge, with policies often preventing network teams from collecting data from certain parts of the network or limiting what data they can send to cloud-based tools. Second, they are dealing with architectural issues such as scalability limits, data collection errors, and insufficient support for modern architecture like hybrid and multi-cloud. Third, they encounter skills gaps on network teams which prevent them from instrumenting the network completely. This leads to blind spots. Finally, cost and licensing issues place ceilings on how much data operators can collect with their tools. This forces them to make hard choices about what aspects of their environment they can and can't monitor.

Network Data Quality Must be a Priority

The stakes for network data quality are about to increase. The status quo is already untenable, but AI investments will push network data to its breaking point. EMA research finds that most IT organizations expect to embrace agentic network operations over the next two years. Given the low number of IT professionals who believe their network data quality can enable this AI-powered future, IT leaders need to tackle the issue of network data now.

EMA proposes that CIOs introduce a network data architecture practice or at least appoint a network data architect who thinks about things in terms of data, not just tools. This architecture practice should have the authority and budget needed to remediate the data quality issues that most network infrastructure and operations teams are struggling against. Last year a network architect told me that his organization spends $2 million a year with its network infrastructure vendor, but his CIO declined to approve a $60,000 request for a source of truth tool that would improve how intent data was managed. This points to blind spot that many IT organizations have about the criticality of this data problem.

Most large IT organizations already have people capable of taking on a network data architecture role. They are often serving as network observability or network automation architects, NetDevOps engineers, or data architects. They spend a lot of time implementing the tools that drive network operations, but they also have first-hand experience with the data quality issues that challenge those tools.

The Mission of Network Data Architects

The network data architecture team should work across groups to establish standards for data quality and management. It should conduct a thorough review of all systems of record for network intent and all network observability tools. The team should establish tools and processes for network data management across systems, and it should recommend ways to improve data quality, eliminate data silos, and optimize telemetry collection.

Here are some examples of what a network data architecture practice might do:

  • Establish a network source of truth that consolidates, governs, and models network intent data.
  • Modernize network observability tools by adopting industry-standard streaming telemetry technologies to improve data collection and eliminate proprietary data silos.
  • Integrate disparate network observability tools at multiple levels, including the adoption of MCP servers to provide agentic access to network data.
  • Establish tools that enable network teams to compare network intent and network state in real-time

EMA believes IT leaders can dramatically improve network resilience, security, compliance, and operational efficiency by establishing a network data architecture practice and empowering its people with budget resources and the authority to make decisions across silos. EMA's recent market research has affirmed that this should be a priority for CIOs, and we will conduct dedicated multi-sponsor market research on the concept of network data architecture in the coming months. If you would like to learn more, please contact me at smcgillicuddy@enterprisemanagement.com.

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

As AI Scales Across Enterprises, Breaking Points Emerge

Rapid AI adoption and the unique ways AI workloads operate is redefining the scope and structure of what these teams must deliver. This shift is forcing organizations to rethink how they manage scale, automation, and control, according to The State of SRE and Platform Engineering 2026, a new report from Dynatrace ...

Preparing Network Infrastructure for AI Starts with the Basics

AI is usually talked about as a software tool, but it also depends heavily on the network behind it. Whether a company is using AI for chatbots, automation, monitoring, analytics, or employee support, all of that information has to move across the network in a reliable and secure way. That means AI is not just an application decision. It is also an infrastructure decision. Before organizations rush into AI, they should ask a simple question: Is our network ready to support it? ...

Agentic Operations Begin with Governed Middleware Access

Enterprise AI often lacks governed access to where business processes actually execute. Without that access, AI agents may be able to reason, but they cannot operate reliably across enterprise workflows. For AI agents to effectively carry out workflows, they will require integration-layer context and controls. Organizations can implement these prerequisites by providing AI with managed access to the middleware layer ...

The Network Data Problem Slowing Down Enterprise AIOps

Enterprise networks rarely behave the same way for very long. A routing adjustment in one region may unexpectedly alter application performance in another. A cloud migration may introduce hidden dependencies that go unnoticed until an outage occurs. All the while, the network is managed by several different teams, each of whom use different tool sets — and as a result, have different views of the network ... There’s usually an engineer who remembers why traffic fails over a certain way between sites, or which transparent firewall was added where. The problem is that human memory cannot scale alongside enterprise-scale networks ...

The Governance Gap Behind AI's Infrastructure Problem

Ask an infrastructure team how confident they are in their ability to govern AI, and most will tell you they've got it handled. A recent survey of 406 IT decision-makers and platform engineering leaders found 86% expressing exactly that confidence. Ask the same group whether they have a formal written AI governance policy, and the number drops to 30%, according to Spacelift's Infrastructure Automation Report ...

MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Podcast - Episode 27: Observability Unification

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 27, Shamus McGillicuddy, EMA VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, and Parker Hathcock, EMA Research Director covering IT Service/Operations (ServiceOps), discuss observability unification in modern IT operations ... 

5 Reasons Traditional VPNs Struggle in a Cloud-First World

Virtual Private Networks became a cornerstone of enterprise security at a time when corporate infrastructure looked very different from today ... For years, this model worked well. But the architecture behind VPNs assumed a centralized corporate environment—one where the network itself was the hub of activity. In a cloud — first world, that assumption no longer holds ...

What 1.8 Million Outages Say About Who Is Really On Call in August

Website outages get resolved just as fast in August as they do in November. I went looking for the opposite: the summer slowdown everyone assumes is there once the people who fix things are away. It isn't in the data we collected, covering 1.8 million confirmed outages across tens of thousands of websites ...

Why Enterprises Are So Unhappy with Their IT Infrastructure

This year, many of the cloud infrastructure contracts signed in the early days of the AI boom will come up for renewal. As the year goes on, I anticipate we'll see a significant amount of cloud vendor swapouts and multi-cloud adoption, and the reason isn't just GPU depreciation. It's because they're tired of their current cloud providers ...

Agentic AI Just Became Your Newest Production Dependency. Are You Tracking It Like One?

There's a moment the many observability teams have experienced days into bringing a new service into production: you realize that the vendor's claims of "intelligent" behavior included a large serving of hype. Their dashboards look nice until they don't, the failure modes are a black box, and no one on the team can confidently explain why the system did what it did at 2 am. Agentic AI is about to force every Ops team to relive that moment at web-scale until they start treating these systems as the dependencies they actually are ...

IT Leaders Must Establish a Network Data Architecture Practice

Shamus McGillicuddy

Network data quality and authority have been problems for a very long time, and IT organizations can no longer afford to ignore the issue. Enterprise Management Associates (EMA) recommends that CIOs establish a network data architecture team and give it the budget and authority needed to improve the data that IT organizations rely on for day-to-day network operations.

When managing a network, an IT organization typically deals with countless classes of network data. This data can be organized into two general categories: intent data and state data. Intent data is a record of how a network should operate, and state data is proof of how the network is operating. So much of modern network operations is about discovering disagreements between intent and state. Answering that question is difficult when the data is scattered and its quality and authority are questionable.

As an analyst who researches how IT organizations design, build, and operate their networks, I find that network data is a constant source of pain. Network teams struggle with data quality, fragmentation, authority, access, and trust. And these issues undermine everything they try to do.

Here are the numbers:

Only 45% of network teams are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth, which documents the intent of their network. 

Additionally, the issue of network data quality stretches beyond network operations. Many other parts of a company rely on network data for critical operations. Cybersecurity teams require network data for incident detection and investigations. DevOps and cloud teams consume network data when making network-related changes to their environments or troubleshooting application issues. Compliance teams have rigorous data requirements when they conduct network audits.

The Network Intent Problem

The fact that only 45% of enterprises are completely confident in the accuracy of their network source of truth points to a major gap in network intent data quality.

Network intent data is critical to all aspects of operations, from designing and deploying networks and implementing changes to responding to network incidents. Examples of intent data include configuration standards, IP address space, network inventory information, connectivity and topology, and security policies.

Engineers reference intent data for a variety of operations. When they make a change, they need to ensure that the change will comply with intent. When they troubleshoot a problem, they need to gather intent data for the problem domain, which helps them identify whether any drift from intent is the root cause of a fault or performance issue.

Good network intent data streamlines manual operations, but it also enables network automation. For example, automation tools with programmatic access to a network source of truth can instantly pull all the data they need to create a new configuration. Additionally, intent data is the foundation of agentic network operations. AI needs to understand how a network should operate before it does anything else.

Network engineers often tell me that intent data is scattered across multiple siloed systems of record, and the quality and authority of those systems are often unclear. For instance, network inventory data might live in two or three network controllers. IP address space often resides in a spreadsheet. And an organization might have two systems of record for config standards. A tier 1 engineer who is working a trouble ticket will struggle to gather info across such an environment.

The Network Observability Data Problem

Lack of trust in network observability data points to a variety of tool problems that are undermining how network teams monitor and troubleshoot their networks. Network observability data is usually siloed and the quality is uneven. Data silos and quality issues lead to visibility gaps, where network operators are blind to emerging problems until disaster strikes.

A company might have one tool for collecting device metrics, another for monitoring flows, a third for collecting and analyzing packets, a fourth for synthetic traffic analysis, and a fifth for detecting config changes. Many tool vendors have proprietary methods for managing data, which makes it difficult for IT organizations to integrate and correlate data across tools. This forces operators to context-switch from one tool to another as they work a problem, and this kills efficiency.

Beyond silos, EMA's recent research found that network operators primarily face four data quality issues with their observability tools. First, security risk is a challenge, with policies often preventing network teams from collecting data from certain parts of the network or limiting what data they can send to cloud-based tools. Second, they are dealing with architectural issues such as scalability limits, data collection errors, and insufficient support for modern architecture like hybrid and multi-cloud. Third, they encounter skills gaps on network teams which prevent them from instrumenting the network completely. This leads to blind spots. Finally, cost and licensing issues place ceilings on how much data operators can collect with their tools. This forces them to make hard choices about what aspects of their environment they can and can't monitor.

Network Data Quality Must be a Priority

The stakes for network data quality are about to increase. The status quo is already untenable, but AI investments will push network data to its breaking point. EMA research finds that most IT organizations expect to embrace agentic network operations over the next two years. Given the low number of IT professionals who believe their network data quality can enable this AI-powered future, IT leaders need to tackle the issue of network data now.

EMA proposes that CIOs introduce a network data architecture practice or at least appoint a network data architect who thinks about things in terms of data, not just tools. This architecture practice should have the authority and budget needed to remediate the data quality issues that most network infrastructure and operations teams are struggling against. Last year a network architect told me that his organization spends $2 million a year with its network infrastructure vendor, but his CIO declined to approve a $60,000 request for a source of truth tool that would improve how intent data was managed. This points to blind spot that many IT organizations have about the criticality of this data problem.

Most large IT organizations already have people capable of taking on a network data architecture role. They are often serving as network observability or network automation architects, NetDevOps engineers, or data architects. They spend a lot of time implementing the tools that drive network operations, but they also have first-hand experience with the data quality issues that challenge those tools.

The Mission of Network Data Architects

The network data architecture team should work across groups to establish standards for data quality and management. It should conduct a thorough review of all systems of record for network intent and all network observability tools. The team should establish tools and processes for network data management across systems, and it should recommend ways to improve data quality, eliminate data silos, and optimize telemetry collection.

Here are some examples of what a network data architecture practice might do:

  • Establish a network source of truth that consolidates, governs, and models network intent data.
  • Modernize network observability tools by adopting industry-standard streaming telemetry technologies to improve data collection and eliminate proprietary data silos.
  • Integrate disparate network observability tools at multiple levels, including the adoption of MCP servers to provide agentic access to network data.
  • Establish tools that enable network teams to compare network intent and network state in real-time

EMA believes IT leaders can dramatically improve network resilience, security, compliance, and operational efficiency by establishing a network data architecture practice and empowering its people with budget resources and the authority to make decisions across silos. EMA's recent market research has affirmed that this should be a priority for CIOs, and we will conduct dedicated multi-sponsor market research on the concept of network data architecture in the coming months. If you would like to learn more, please contact me at smcgillicuddy@enterprisemanagement.com.

Related Links

Hot Topics

The Latest

As AI Scales Across Enterprises, Breaking Points Emerge

Rapid AI adoption and the unique ways AI workloads operate is redefining the scope and structure of what these teams must deliver. This shift is forcing organizations to rethink how they manage scale, automation, and control, according to The State of SRE and Platform Engineering 2026, a new report from Dynatrace ...

Preparing Network Infrastructure for AI Starts with the Basics

AI is usually talked about as a software tool, but it also depends heavily on the network behind it. Whether a company is using AI for chatbots, automation, monitoring, analytics, or employee support, all of that information has to move across the network in a reliable and secure way. That means AI is not just an application decision. It is also an infrastructure decision. Before organizations rush into AI, they should ask a simple question: Is our network ready to support it? ...

Agentic Operations Begin with Governed Middleware Access

Enterprise AI often lacks governed access to where business processes actually execute. Without that access, AI agents may be able to reason, but they cannot operate reliably across enterprise workflows. For AI agents to effectively carry out workflows, they will require integration-layer context and controls. Organizations can implement these prerequisites by providing AI with managed access to the middleware layer ...

The Network Data Problem Slowing Down Enterprise AIOps

Enterprise networks rarely behave the same way for very long. A routing adjustment in one region may unexpectedly alter application performance in another. A cloud migration may introduce hidden dependencies that go unnoticed until an outage occurs. All the while, the network is managed by several different teams, each of whom use different tool sets — and as a result, have different views of the network ... There’s usually an engineer who remembers why traffic fails over a certain way between sites, or which transparent firewall was added where. The problem is that human memory cannot scale alongside enterprise-scale networks ...

The Governance Gap Behind AI's Infrastructure Problem

Ask an infrastructure team how confident they are in their ability to govern AI, and most will tell you they've got it handled. A recent survey of 406 IT decision-makers and platform engineering leaders found 86% expressing exactly that confidence. Ask the same group whether they have a formal written AI governance policy, and the number drops to 30%, according to Spacelift's Infrastructure Automation Report ...

MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Podcast - Episode 27: Observability Unification

In MEAN TIME TO INSIGHT Episode 27, Shamus McGillicuddy, EMA VP of Research, Network Infrastructure and Operations, and Parker Hathcock, EMA Research Director covering IT Service/Operations (ServiceOps), discuss observability unification in modern IT operations ... 

5 Reasons Traditional VPNs Struggle in a Cloud-First World

Virtual Private Networks became a cornerstone of enterprise security at a time when corporate infrastructure looked very different from today ... For years, this model worked well. But the architecture behind VPNs assumed a centralized corporate environment—one where the network itself was the hub of activity. In a cloud — first world, that assumption no longer holds ...

What 1.8 Million Outages Say About Who Is Really On Call in August

Website outages get resolved just as fast in August as they do in November. I went looking for the opposite: the summer slowdown everyone assumes is there once the people who fix things are away. It isn't in the data we collected, covering 1.8 million confirmed outages across tens of thousands of websites ...

Why Enterprises Are So Unhappy with Their IT Infrastructure

This year, many of the cloud infrastructure contracts signed in the early days of the AI boom will come up for renewal. As the year goes on, I anticipate we'll see a significant amount of cloud vendor swapouts and multi-cloud adoption, and the reason isn't just GPU depreciation. It's because they're tired of their current cloud providers ...

Agentic AI Just Became Your Newest Production Dependency. Are You Tracking It Like One?

There's a moment the many observability teams have experienced days into bringing a new service into production: you realize that the vendor's claims of "intelligent" behavior included a large serving of hype. Their dashboards look nice until they don't, the failure modes are a black box, and no one on the team can confidently explain why the system did what it did at 2 am. Agentic AI is about to force every Ops team to relive that moment at web-scale until they start treating these systems as the dependencies they actually are ...