Skip to main content

Data Engineers Spend 2 Days Per Week Firefighting Bad Data

Data professionals are spending 40% of their time evaluating or checking data quality and that poor data quality impacts 26% of their companies' revenue, according to The State of Data Quality 2022, a report commissioned by Monte Carlo and conducted by Wakefield Research.

The survey found that 75% of participants take four or more hours to detect a data quality incident and about half said it takes an average of nine hours to resolve the issue once identified. Worse, 58% said the total number of incidents has increased somewhat or greatly over the past year, often as a result of more complex pipelines, bigger data teams, greater volumes of data, and other factors.

Today, the average organization experiences about 61 data-related incidents per month, each of which takes an average of 13 hours to identify and resolve. This adds up to an average of about 793 hours per month, per company.

However, 61 incidents only represents the number of incidents known to respondents.

"In the mid-2010s, organizations were shocked to learn that their data scientists were spending about 60% of their time just getting data ready for analysis," said Barr Moses, Monte Carlo CEO and co-founder. "Now, even with more mature data organizations and advanced stacks, data teams are still wasting 40% of their time troubleshooting data downtime. Not only is this wasting valuable engineering time, but it's also costing precious revenue and diverting attention away from initiatives that move the needle for the business. These results validate that data reliability is one of the biggest and most urgent problems facing today's data and analytics leaders."

Nearly half of respondent organizations measure data quality most often by the number of customer complaints their company receives, highlighting the ad hoc - and reputation damaging - nature of this important element of modern data strategy.

The Cost of Data Downtime

"Garbage in, garbage out" aptly describes the impact data quality has on data analytics and machine learning. If the data is unreliable, so are the insights derived from it.

In fact, on average, respondents said bad data impacts 26% of their revenue. This validates and supplements other industry studies that have uncovered the high cost of bad data. For example, Gartner estimates poor data quality costs organizations an average $12.9 million every year.

Nearly half said business stakeholders are impacted by issues the data team doesn't catch most of the time, or all the time.

In fact, according to the survey, respondents that conducted at least three different types of data tests for distribution, schema, volume, null or freshness anomalies at least once a week suffered fewer data incidents (46) on average than respondents with a less rigorous testing regime (61). However, testing alone was insufficient and stronger testing did not have a significant correlation with reducing the level of impact on revenue or stakeholders.

"Testing helps reduce data incidents, but no human being is capable of anticipating and writing a test for every way data pipelines can break. And if they could, it wouldn't be possible to scale across their always changing environment," said Lior Gavish, Monte Carlo CTO and co-founder. "Machine learning-powered anomaly monitoring and alerting through data observability can help teams close these coverage gaps and save data engineers' time."

Hot Topics

The Latest

Most organizations approach OpenTelemetry as a collection of individual tools they need to assemble from scratch. This view misses the bigger picture. OpenTelemetry is a complete telemetry framework with composable components that address specific problems at different stages of organizational maturity. You start with what you need today and adopt additional pieces as your observability practices evolve ...

One of the earliest lessons I learned from architecting throughput-heavy services is that simplicity wins repeatedly: fewer moving parts, loosely coupled execution (fewer synchronous calls), and precise timing metering. You want data and decisions to travel the shortest possible path. The goal is to build a system where every strategy and each line of code (contention is the key metric) complements the decision trees ...

As discussions around AI "autonomous coworkers" accelerate, many industry projections assume that agents will soon operate alongside human staff in making decisions, taking actions, and managing tasks with minimal oversight. But a growing number of critics (including some of the developers building these systems) argue that the industry still has a long way to go to be able to treat AI agents like fully trusted teammates ...

Enterprise AI has entered a transformational phase where, according to Digitate's recently released survey, Agentic AI and the Future of Enterprise IT, companies are moving beyond traditional automation toward Agentic AI systems designed to reason, adapt, and collaborate alongside human teams ...

The numbers back this urgency up. A recent Zapier survey shows that 92% of enterprises now treat AI as a top priority. Leaders want it, and teams are clamoring for it. But if you look closer at the operations of these companies, you see a different picture. The rollout is slow. The results are often delayed. There's a disconnect between what leaders want and what their technical infrastructure can handle ...

Kyndryl's 2025 Readiness Report revealed that 61% of global business and technology leaders report increasing pressure from boards and regulators to prove AI's ROI. As the technology evolves and expectations continue to rise, leaders are compelled to generate and prove impact before scaling further. This will lead to a decisive turning point in 2026 ...

Cloudflare's disruption illustrates how quickly a single provider's issue cascades into widespread exposure. Many organizations don't fully realize how tightly their systems are coupled to thirdparty services, or how quickly availability and security concerns align when those services falter ... You can't avoid these dependencies, but you can understand them ...

If you work with AI, you know this story. A model performs during testing, looks great in early reviews, works perfectly in production and then slowly loses relevance after operating for a while. Everything on the surface looks perfect — pipelines are running, predictions or recommendations are error-free, data quality checks show green; yet outcomes don't meet the ground reality. This pattern often repeats across enterprise AI programs. Take for example, a mid-sized retail banking and wealth-management firm with heavy investments in AI-powered risk analytics, fraud detection and personalized credit-decisioning systems. The model worked well for a while, but transactions increased, so did false positives by 18% ...

Basic uptime is no longer the gold standard. By 2026, network monitoring must do more than report status, it must explain performance in a hybrid-first world. Networks are no longer just static support systems; they are agile, distributed architectures that sit at the very heart of the customer experience and the business outcomes ... The following five trends represent the new standard for network health, providing a blueprint for teams to move from reactive troubleshooting to a proactive, integrated future ...

APMdigest's Predictions Series concludes with 2026 AI Predictions — industry experts offer predictions on how AI and related technologies will evolve and impact business in 2026. Part 5, the final installment, covers AI's impacts on IT teams ...

Data Engineers Spend 2 Days Per Week Firefighting Bad Data

Data professionals are spending 40% of their time evaluating or checking data quality and that poor data quality impacts 26% of their companies' revenue, according to The State of Data Quality 2022, a report commissioned by Monte Carlo and conducted by Wakefield Research.

The survey found that 75% of participants take four or more hours to detect a data quality incident and about half said it takes an average of nine hours to resolve the issue once identified. Worse, 58% said the total number of incidents has increased somewhat or greatly over the past year, often as a result of more complex pipelines, bigger data teams, greater volumes of data, and other factors.

Today, the average organization experiences about 61 data-related incidents per month, each of which takes an average of 13 hours to identify and resolve. This adds up to an average of about 793 hours per month, per company.

However, 61 incidents only represents the number of incidents known to respondents.

"In the mid-2010s, organizations were shocked to learn that their data scientists were spending about 60% of their time just getting data ready for analysis," said Barr Moses, Monte Carlo CEO and co-founder. "Now, even with more mature data organizations and advanced stacks, data teams are still wasting 40% of their time troubleshooting data downtime. Not only is this wasting valuable engineering time, but it's also costing precious revenue and diverting attention away from initiatives that move the needle for the business. These results validate that data reliability is one of the biggest and most urgent problems facing today's data and analytics leaders."

Nearly half of respondent organizations measure data quality most often by the number of customer complaints their company receives, highlighting the ad hoc - and reputation damaging - nature of this important element of modern data strategy.

The Cost of Data Downtime

"Garbage in, garbage out" aptly describes the impact data quality has on data analytics and machine learning. If the data is unreliable, so are the insights derived from it.

In fact, on average, respondents said bad data impacts 26% of their revenue. This validates and supplements other industry studies that have uncovered the high cost of bad data. For example, Gartner estimates poor data quality costs organizations an average $12.9 million every year.

Nearly half said business stakeholders are impacted by issues the data team doesn't catch most of the time, or all the time.

In fact, according to the survey, respondents that conducted at least three different types of data tests for distribution, schema, volume, null or freshness anomalies at least once a week suffered fewer data incidents (46) on average than respondents with a less rigorous testing regime (61). However, testing alone was insufficient and stronger testing did not have a significant correlation with reducing the level of impact on revenue or stakeholders.

"Testing helps reduce data incidents, but no human being is capable of anticipating and writing a test for every way data pipelines can break. And if they could, it wouldn't be possible to scale across their always changing environment," said Lior Gavish, Monte Carlo CTO and co-founder. "Machine learning-powered anomaly monitoring and alerting through data observability can help teams close these coverage gaps and save data engineers' time."

Hot Topics

The Latest

Most organizations approach OpenTelemetry as a collection of individual tools they need to assemble from scratch. This view misses the bigger picture. OpenTelemetry is a complete telemetry framework with composable components that address specific problems at different stages of organizational maturity. You start with what you need today and adopt additional pieces as your observability practices evolve ...

One of the earliest lessons I learned from architecting throughput-heavy services is that simplicity wins repeatedly: fewer moving parts, loosely coupled execution (fewer synchronous calls), and precise timing metering. You want data and decisions to travel the shortest possible path. The goal is to build a system where every strategy and each line of code (contention is the key metric) complements the decision trees ...

As discussions around AI "autonomous coworkers" accelerate, many industry projections assume that agents will soon operate alongside human staff in making decisions, taking actions, and managing tasks with minimal oversight. But a growing number of critics (including some of the developers building these systems) argue that the industry still has a long way to go to be able to treat AI agents like fully trusted teammates ...

Enterprise AI has entered a transformational phase where, according to Digitate's recently released survey, Agentic AI and the Future of Enterprise IT, companies are moving beyond traditional automation toward Agentic AI systems designed to reason, adapt, and collaborate alongside human teams ...

The numbers back this urgency up. A recent Zapier survey shows that 92% of enterprises now treat AI as a top priority. Leaders want it, and teams are clamoring for it. But if you look closer at the operations of these companies, you see a different picture. The rollout is slow. The results are often delayed. There's a disconnect between what leaders want and what their technical infrastructure can handle ...

Kyndryl's 2025 Readiness Report revealed that 61% of global business and technology leaders report increasing pressure from boards and regulators to prove AI's ROI. As the technology evolves and expectations continue to rise, leaders are compelled to generate and prove impact before scaling further. This will lead to a decisive turning point in 2026 ...

Cloudflare's disruption illustrates how quickly a single provider's issue cascades into widespread exposure. Many organizations don't fully realize how tightly their systems are coupled to thirdparty services, or how quickly availability and security concerns align when those services falter ... You can't avoid these dependencies, but you can understand them ...

If you work with AI, you know this story. A model performs during testing, looks great in early reviews, works perfectly in production and then slowly loses relevance after operating for a while. Everything on the surface looks perfect — pipelines are running, predictions or recommendations are error-free, data quality checks show green; yet outcomes don't meet the ground reality. This pattern often repeats across enterprise AI programs. Take for example, a mid-sized retail banking and wealth-management firm with heavy investments in AI-powered risk analytics, fraud detection and personalized credit-decisioning systems. The model worked well for a while, but transactions increased, so did false positives by 18% ...

Basic uptime is no longer the gold standard. By 2026, network monitoring must do more than report status, it must explain performance in a hybrid-first world. Networks are no longer just static support systems; they are agile, distributed architectures that sit at the very heart of the customer experience and the business outcomes ... The following five trends represent the new standard for network health, providing a blueprint for teams to move from reactive troubleshooting to a proactive, integrated future ...

APMdigest's Predictions Series concludes with 2026 AI Predictions — industry experts offer predictions on how AI and related technologies will evolve and impact business in 2026. Part 5, the final installment, covers AI's impacts on IT teams ...