Data Issue Escalation Path Template
How unresolved data issues move when decisions stall
Most data issues don’t stay open because they’re complex. They stay open because no one forces a decision.
I’ve rarely seen a recurring data problem that wasn’t really a stalled escalation.
This template exists to fix that.
What this is
This is a Data Issue Escalation Path Template I use to make unresolved issues move when disagreement happens.
It is not:
A process diagram
A governance org chart
A meeting structure
It is:
A decision velocity mechanism
A rule-based escalation model
A control layer for stalled issues
The goal is simple:
Define when an issue escalates
Define who decides at each level
Define how long something can stall
When to use it
Use this template when:
An issue stays open for weeks
KPI definitions are debated repeatedly
Ownership disputes resurface
Data quality thresholds are never enforced
AI models are retrained due to definition changes
No one can answer “who decides if we disagree?”
If an issue matters enough to discuss, it matters enough to move.
The real problem it addresses
Most organisations already have:
Tickets
Governance forums
Data councils
Steering committees
What they don’t have:
Time-bound escalation
Clear level transitions
Explicit decision authority
Rule-based triggers
Without those, governance becomes discussion instead of control.
Discussion does not scale.
The template
You can access the full Data Issue Escalation Path Template here:
It includes:
A 4-level escalation model
Defined time limits
Clear escalation triggers
Decision rights clarity
SLA discipline rules
A standard issue log structure
It is built to force movement, not meetings.
How to use it in practice
This works best when you:
Set time limits per escalation level
Make escalation automatic after missed deadlines
Separate operational resolution from executive escalation
Document decisions visibly
Review escalation patterns quarterly
If everything escalates upward, your operating model is broken.
Common misuse
Avoid:
Escalating emotionally instead of by rule
Skipping deadlines “just this once”
Assigning ownership to “the team”
Escalating everything to senior leadership
Keeping decisions in private Slack threads
Governance dies in private threads.
Why this matters even more now
AI amplifies unresolved conflicts.
If ownership is vague:
The model inherits vagueness
If definitions shift:
Outputs shift
If decisions stall:
Deployment stalls
Escalation discipline equals decision velocity.
AI without escalation discipline creates scaled confusion.
Start here
If you want:
Fewer recurring data issues
Faster decisions
Stronger AI readiness
Real governance discipline
Start by fixing how issues move.
If issues do not move, governance is not real.
More tools will follow.
Hi John,
wow, this is project management 101. Have we really gotten so bad in our industry that we need things like this to be published? People need to be TOLD these things?
I mean, I saw my first issue register and problem log in 1982 as an 18 year old programming trainee. Even then it was presented to me as "normal". I am still using variations of them today.