To follow the thought process from The Case for a Single Repository, a central repository also makes it easier to deal with compliance audits when and if they happen. Having all your information in one place makes you better prepared for audits, and being better prepared increases your chances of survival.
For the most part, cases against having a single repository come from the challenges of getting one set up. I always hear people say, “I want it, but I can’t defend the cost.” I won’t pretend that it’s not difficult to set up and can be costly. But it can be one of those cases where you pay now or pay more later. Setting up a central repository is a big project, especially if your data is currently spread out all over your organization, in different tools, adhering to no set of standards.
Over time, however, you might find that without a single repository, you’re constantly redoing the same, frustrating work, chasing things down, trying to fix inconsistencies. Your results may be error prone and unreliable as a result, because the more you do manually, the greater the risk that the information will be mishandled at some point — unless you involve a lot of people and a lot of checks and balances in the process.
Is a single repository worth it? It depends on the complexity of your organization, and on your perspective.
If your environment is complex enough, and if you have a clear sense of your organizational inefficiencies and how they come into play as you manage information, then a single repository will take the pain away.
Then, it’s worth it.
Using metadata management tools that are fully integrated with a single repository takes away some of the pain required to set it up, and increases the speed to ROI. That makes it easier to sell to the business. It also — and this is the most important part — gives you the decision making power you need to transform the enterprise.