Building a Data-Driven Culture: Whose Job Is It Actually?

A debate came up in the Power BI community recently that I could not leave alone. The argument went like this... it is the analyst's job to champion and promote a data-driven culture and if the analysts can influence the leaders to make data-driven decisions, then naturally the leaders will adopt data and everyone else will align. So remember, it is not the leader's job to drive a data culture, it is yours.

Now, there is a truth in that argument and I will give it fair time below, because analysts showing the value of data genuinely matters. But my fundamental point stands, and it is the point I made at the time. Without top-level backing, it is not going to happen. From over a decade of doing this work, across retail, healthcare, financial services, charities and more, that is not how it plays out in most places. I always say without the top-level, executive backing, executive sponsorship, call it what you will call it, its one step forward, two steps back!

Here is my position in one line. A data-driven culture is a business objective, not a BI objective, and only leadership can make it one.

Summary

A data-driven culture means decisions across the business are guided by data rather than gut feel, seniority or the most influential (loudest). The analysts, the BI team and the central data team should absolutely drive and promote the right use of data, but a data-driven culture cannot be achieved only from the analysts promoting it. It needs top-down promotion, executive backing and support from the people who can hold the authority line. Without that, the push comes across as an IT or BI objective and the business quietly pushes back because they have their own priorities, meetings, strategies and KPIs. I have seen this time and time again. Plus from personal experience in various roles over the years, I experienced this myself. In all roles I have been in, the thign holding us back from achieving a data-driven culture wasn't the core data team, it was they were the only ones promoting it and trying to embed it. This was a losing battle if executives, SLT, C-Level were not making this a priority.

Key takeaways

• Analysts and BI teams have a real job here, championing data, delivering wins and building trust. But championing is not the same as owning.
• Promoting a culture and embedding one are different jobs. Analysts can promote. Only leadership can embed, because embedding runs through funding, governance, incentives and accountability.
• Without executive backing there is no authority or accountability to hold the line, so progress hits a ceiling no matter how good the dashboards/data platform is.
• The message has to come from the top, communicated as a business objective. If it is just the data team (or IT) promoting a new way of working, there is often resistance.
• This is not just my view. Many credible sources, from Microsoft to McKinsey to Harvard Business Review, stand by this point, and it matches what I have seen over ten plus years working in BI and analytics.
• Bottom-up effort is not wasted, it is how you can earn more sponsorship. Early wins can convince leadership to step up and that is exactly what a good BI team should aim for.
• However, in my opinion bottom-up effort on its own will be wasted, it only pays off when it earns top-level backing. Use early wins to convince leadership to step up, because without that the effort hits the ceiling and comes to nothing.

What a data-driven culture actually looks like

Before we argue about whose job it is, let us be clear on what we are building. The way I define it, a data-driven culture is the set of shared behaviours and norms where people across the organisation habitually use trusted data, rather than opinion, hierarchy or gut feel, as the default basis for decisions, supported by leadership, governance, skills and access.

Notice that is a definition about behaviours, not a stack of dashboards. In practice it looks like weekly meetings that focus on action instead of debating which number is right. It looks like senior leaders trusting the data even under pressure, not defaulting to "I have ten plus years of experience, I am right". It looks like people at every level having access to the data they need, with the confidence to use it in their day-to-day decisions.

I wrote about this in more depth, with real examples from my retail work, in Building a Data-Driven Culture in Retail. The essentials in that blog apply well beyond retail, and the biggest blocker I named there is the same one this blog is about.

The pattern I keep seeing without executive support

Let me share what happens when the culture push is left to the data team alone, because I have lived it more than once. These are real organisations I have supported over the years.

In one, there was clear appetite at the core data team level, real energy, good people. But there was no top-down support. Senior leaders saw data as the BI team's job, not a shared responsibility. Nothing changed.

In another, leadership loved the idea of being data-driven. They said all the right things. But they did not change how they made decisions. Reports were created, then ignored and the culture never took root.

Then there is the one that has stuck with me the longest. I once worked in an organisation where the BI team, myself included, was literally based in the basement. We were expected to lead data adoption across the business, yet we had no voice, no visibility and no exec sponsor. We built the perfect data platform, established a CoE, we drove initiatives from the ground up, we tried to rally people. It never gained real traction, because without senior backing it was always going to hit a ceiling. Honestly, a lack of executive support is one of the reasons I have walked away from roles in the past.

Notice what these have in common... in none of them was the problem the technology, the dashboards or the talent. The root cause was the same each time, a lack of executive support and real behaviour change at the top. Also, it needs to go beyond just a one or two time conversation from executives, they need to really make this a priority.

Why bottom-up alone hits a ceiling

So why can the analysts not just influence their way to a data culture? Think about what the job actually requires.

The analysts cannot promote all business areas to be data-driven. Each area has its own priorities, its own meetings, its own strategies and KPIs. When the push comes from the data team, it lands as a BI, IT or data objective, something optional, someone else's initiative. The business will politely nod and carry on as before. For the culture to stick, it has to be a business objective, and only the top can make it one.

There is also a hard authority question underneath this. Who owns the agreed definitions when two departments disagree? Who funds the training and the platform? Who holds a director accountable when they ignore the numbers and go with gut feel? An analyst can influence all of these conversations, but they can decide none of them.

I am not alone on this, far from it. Every serious framework I have come across treats executive sponsorship as necessary, and I have yet to find a credible one that claims a data culture can be built without leadership. Microsoft's own Fabric adoption roadmap calls an executive sponsor "imperative", because analytics adoption is far more than a technology project. It even addresses the bottom-up approach directly, describing a pattern where local success convinces leadership to increase their sponsorship, but warning that a sponsor without formal authority will sooner or later run into challenges beyond their level, which is why top-down has a higher probability of success. McKinsey puts it plainly too, "Commitment from the CEO and the board is essential." That matches my experience almost exactly, and it is reassuring to see it in black and white.

Promoting a culture and embedding one are not the same job

Here is a distinction I find helps cut through the whole debate. Promoting a data-driven culture and embedding one sound like the same thing, but they are two different jobs with two different owners.

Promoting is making the case. Communicating the value, modelling the behaviour, running the training, celebrating the wins, building the community. Analysts, the BI team, a Centre of Excellence and your champions across the business can absolutely lead this, and they should.

Embedding is wiring the culture into how the organisation actually runs. Governance, funding, incentives, the operating model, decision rights, what gets measured and rewarded. That work requires formal authority, and it can only be owned by an executive sponsor and the leadership team.

A BI team can promote all day. It cannot embed on its own. This is why so many culture initiatives feel like one step forward, two steps back... the promotion happens, the enthusiasm builds and then nothing structural changes to hold it in place.

What executive sponsorship actually means

Now, let me be clear about what I am asking for, because executive sponsorship is not a signature on a budget line and a good luck message. Over the years I have seen what real sponsorship looks like, and it comes down to visible behaviours:

• Leading by example: directors using data in their own decisions, asking for the evidence in meetings, opening the report themselves rather than asking for a summary in an email.
• Communicating it as a business objective: the message lands in all-hands meetings and company updates from a senior voice, not in a newsletter from the BI team.
• Funding and prioritising: approving the licences, the training and the people, and protecting that investment when budgets get tight.
• Holding the line: when someone challenges the agreed numbers or works around the process, someone with authority backs the standard.

One thing I want to be balanced about here. Sponsorship on its own is not enough either. McKinsey makes the point in the same piece that a data culture cannot simply be imported or imposed from above, and I agree with that too. A mandate with no pull from below is just a memo. You need both, the authority from the top and the genuine engagement underneath it, which is exactly where the BI team earns its keep.

When execs lead from the front like this, people pay attention and follow suit. When leadership stays silent or disconnected, no amount of dashboards, quick wins or passion from your data team will make a lasting difference. I have seen both versions play out, and the difference is night and day.

What the BI team can and should do

Here is the part I want to be fair about, because the community debate I opened with does contain a truth. Influence upward is real and the BI team is not powerless while it waits for sponsorship to arrive.

You can make great progress inside a data team. You can deliver brilliant solutions, get glowing feedback and build momentum in pockets of the business. So do exactly that, deliberately:

• Speak the language of business value: link the work to revenue, cost, risk and retention, not to models and platforms. In less data-mature leadership teams this shift in messaging matters more than anything technical.
• Prove impact, not output: "we delivered fifteen reports" convinces nobody. "This report changed how the rota is planned and coverage improved" gets a director's attention. I shared a practical way to do this in How to Measure Power BI Adoption (Not Just Usage).
• Win the influencers, not just the execs: every organisation has people who are not senior but carry credibility, the ones others follow. Get them on side, make them advocates really try to win them over as they will further promote.
• ‍Use the wins to earn the sponsorship: even Microsoft's guidance notes that early bottom-up successes can convince leadership to increase their level of sponsorship. That is the realistic path, not influence replacing authority, but influence earning it.

So no, I do not tell BI teams to sit on their hands until an exec shows up. I tell them their job is to create the conditions for sponsorship and the exec's job is to provide it. Both jobs are real. Only one of them can hold the authority line.

How Metis BI helps

This is work we do with clients all the time, and I will be honest about it, the technical side is usually the easier half. Executive support is the first foundation in the governance framework I present at user groups and deliver with organisations, because everything else, the semantic models, the definitions, the security, the rollout, stands on it. We help organisations get that foundation right, from securing and briefing the sponsor through to the workshops, definitions and framework that turn the backing into practice. If you want a clear read on where your organisation stands today, our Power BI and Microsoft Fabric governance assessment is a good place to start.

Summary

A data-driven culture is not built by dashboards, and it is not built by analysts alone, however good they are. The BI team drives, promotes and earns trust. Leadership owns the change, funds it, models it and holds the line. When both do their jobs, the culture takes root. When the whole thing is left to the data team, it hits a ceiling, and I have watched that ceiling from the basement myself.

So if the debate comes up in your organisation, whose job is the data culture, the honest answer is both, with one clear condition. It has to be communicated, backed and led from the top as a business objective, not a BI one.

This blog sits alongside Power BI Governance: The Foundations Matter More Than Ever, where executive support appears as the first foundation of the framework, and it expands on the blockers I first wrote about in Building a Data-Driven Culture in Retail.