Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Tania Neild
InfoGrate Incorporated, USA
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This case study will describe the efforts behind designing a first iteration of an evolutionary,
iterative enterprise-wide data warehouse for AIIA Corp., a financial application service provider. The
study demonstrates the importance of the following steps during a data-warehousing project: a well-
defined mission, effective requirement collection, detailed logical definitions, and an efficient meth-
odology for source systems and infrastructure development.
AIIA is a financial distributor that offers separately managed account and investment products
with practice management services to financial advisors through a Web-based portal that can also be
configured and private-labeled for the advisors to use with their clients. Unlike most companies, AIIA
offers the advisors a hybrid of investment information and technology solutions, both designed with
an open architecture.
BACKGROUND
AIIA, the company described in this case, is established on the idea of seizing changes in the
following three areas of the financial industry:
1. Distribution/Channel
2. Operations (or the Business Model)
3. Manufacture (or Products)
Each will be discussed here as they relate to the opportunity that the company filled.
1. Distribution/Channel. In the past ten years, there has been a substantial migration of brokers
away from the institutional brokerage houses (where they turned over large commission to their
wire house) to smaller, independent shops that are fee based. There are now over 20,000
registered independent advisors (RIAs), and this new market is growing each year. While some
of these advisors are grouped into regional consortiums or independent broker dealers (IBD),
the market is still relatively fragmented and distributed. Without the tools, research, and
products of their former companies, the advisors have little infrastructure in place to reach and
service their clients.
2. Operations (or the Business Model). The second main change was the growing acceptance
of the application service provider (ASP) business model. Applications could be “leased” for
use over the web on a monthly basis. For the users, this lowers the up-front cost, reduces
maintenance costs, and mitigates risk;, allowing new companies to enter a market previously
unreachable.
3. Manufacture (or Products). As mutual funds became mainstream, new separately managed
account products became more palpable to those with $800,000 to $8,000,000 in investable assets
(note that the inefficiencies of the mutual fund are not as significant for smaller investments
totaling less than $800,000, and for those with more than $8,000,000 there are other advanced
products that are available). When an investor owns a mutual fund, they own a slice of a fund
in which, while managed according to some style or investment philosophy, the specifics stocks
are generally unknown. For clients with multiple investments, transparency of the funds ensures
that they are not over-allocated to a particular stock or sector. Additionally, mutual funds have
an inherent tax injustice: if one buys a fund today and tomorrow sells a stock with a large capital
gain, then he/she would realize the tax consequences of the gain without the appreciation in the
asset. For an investor with substantial tax planning issues, the mutual fund is problematic.
Separately managed accounts retain the efficiencies of a mutual fund, allowing the manager to
pool assets together, and thereby gaining the same institutional transaction pricing and ability
to manage and monitor the collective assets according to a model portfolio style expert. However,
separately managed accounts also allow the investor to own, see and tailor their account to
handle particular tax and asset allocation nuances of the financial picture.
Together these three trends opened the door to a host of new companies, one of which is AIIA
Corp. (see Figure 1).
There are companies that provide technology/applications to the advisors, and there are others
that offer separately managed account products. Some companies charge monthly for the technology,
some adhere to a transaction-oriented model and others have embraced the fee-based “assets under
management” approach. AIIA is designed to offer all of the comforts of the advisors’ former brokerage
AIIA 3, 6
Portfolio
5
2 Managers
Custodian 6 Investors
4
Advisor
1
End
Designing a First-Iteration Data Warehouse 489
house, both investment products and applications, through a fee-based revenue model. For example,
if Investor I places $1,000,000 into a separately managed account with Manager X, via the AIIA
platform, and X buys 10 different securities in the portfolio for I, then I would pay based on a fraction
of a percentage of the $1,000,000 rather than $Y per manager transaction, as is typically the case with
many well-known investment products (such as those provided by Schwab or Fidelity). The unique
hybrid of technology and investment products provides “one-stop shopping” for the advisor. An
interesting twist on this situation is the pivot point between the old and the new. While the
independence of the advisors is new, their core needs are the same. And while the creation of the
separately managed accounts is new, traditional investment products are still practical for the average
investors. Therefore, the new company must back-fill to satisfy the older offering, while embracing
the new products and technology. Typically, companies are either converting with the marketplace
going from old to new offerings, or they are new and focused predominately on the new solution set.
To handle this delicate dynamic, AIIA has formed an operational and technical glue between managers,
custodians, and other traditional and relevant investment and technology providers, while building
new core value-added offerings.
CEO
ability for the solution to permit easy data exchange was at the forefront of the decision. While typically
the extract-transform-load (ETL) process presents its own unique challenges for a data-warehousing
project, AIIA’s open architecture eliminated the usual complexities of extraction and load part of the
process. Physical integration of the systems was a prerequisite. Flexibility and logical integration
became the primary issues, allowing AIIA to concentrate on the mission of the data warehouse rather
than on the “how” of the data warehouse.
CASE DESCRIPTION
Introduction
AIIA decided to draw on rich and varied data sources (both internal and external) to build a data
warehouse, in order to turn the information into meaningful knowledge and in turn act to convert the
knowledge to profit. AIIA’s data warehousing project is in compliance with a definition of a data
warehouse as a separate physical repository, typically maintained separately from the organization’s
operational databases, used for consolidating data that has been organized to facilitate analytical
processing and strategic decision support (Chaudhuri & Dayal, 1997). Unlike any other information
systems initiative, the data warehouse implementation is an iterative process whereby each analytical
requirement is built upon the prior system iterations. Therefore, the first iteration of the data warehouse
must be both flexible to allow future analytics to be added and structured to minimize future iteration’s
development ambiguity. This case describes AIIA’s efforts of developing its first data warehouse
iteration that satisfies those requirements.
Web site, etc) between AIIA, advisors and investors had to be analyzed. Again, basic money manager,
product and security information was required and it represented the dimensions for CIMA.
Additionally, specific information about duration and mode of contact was also required. Of course,
the number and frequency of contacts varies with time, so the date/time dimension was considered
as another critical dimension.
Figure 3: FA
Balance (Holding) Fact
Table
Time Key (FK) Product Dimension
Time Dimension Product Key (FK) Product Key (PK)
Time Key (PK) Account Key (FK) Product ID
Year Security Key (FK) Product Name
Quarter Dollar Amount Class
Month Unit Amount Style
D4 F1
Full Date … Manager ID
D2
Manager Name
Revenue Fact Table
Time Key (FK)
Product Key (FK)
Account Key (FK)
Dollar Amount (calc.) Account Dimension
… F2 Account Key (PK)
AccountID
AdvisorID
Security Transaction
Advisor Name
Fact Table
InvestorID
Time Key (FK) Investor Name
Product Key (FK) CustodianID D1
Security Dimension Account Key (FK) Custodian Name
Security Key (FK)
Security Key (PK) Dollar Amount
Security ID Time of Day
D3
Security Name Buy/Sell Flag F3
…
Figure 4: CIMA
Advisor Contact Fact
Table
Time Key (FK) Contact Item Dimension
Time Dimension Contact Item Key (FK) Contact Item Key (PK)
Time Key (PK) Account Key (FK) Contact Item ID
Year Contact Md. Key (FK) Contact Item Type
Quarter Contact Hnd. Key (FK) Contact Item Category
Month Advisor ID
D4 F4
Full Date Time of Day
Duration D6
Nature
Initiated By
Contact Mode Dimension …
Contact Mode Key (PK)
Contact Mode ID Account Dimension
Contact Mode Name Investor Contact Fact
D7 Table Account Key (PK)
AccountID
Time Key (FK) AdvisorID
Contact Item Key (FK) Advisor Name
Account Key (FK) InvestorID
Contact Md. Key (FK) Investor Name
Contact Handler
D5 Contact Hnd. Key (FK) CustodianID
Dimension D1
Investor ID Custodian Name
Handler Key (PK) Time of Day F5
Handler ID Duration
Handler Name Nature
Department Name Initiated By
Sub-department Name …
494 Jukic & Neild
Fiscal Analysis
While the most common queries for FA concern accounts by advisor and balances within one
account, examples of other desired FA calculations and roll-ups include:
• List the managers whose products are used by less than 10% of advisors. (M1)
• Find the top/bottom 10 most profitable accounts. (M2)
• Find the top/bottom 10 most profitable advisors. (M2)
• Find the top/bottom 10 securities by the amount of holdings in all accounts. (M1)
• Compare the holdings in all accounts between domestic and international equity for the last 4
quarters and then roll it up for the whole last year. (M1)
• For each month within the past two years, list the manager whose product attracted most newly
created accounts. (M1 & M2)
• Compare revenue generated by advisors from different territories. (M2)
• Compare the list of 10 most profitable advisors with the list of 10 advisors whose accounts have
the highest cumulative AIIA transactional cost. (M2)
• List the top 15 securities by the amount of holdings across all accounts. (M1)
In addition to the AIIA internal analysis (as illustrated by the above listed examples), individual
advisors will be able to perform FA as well, within their own accounts. Individual advisors will be
provided with the possibility to get answers to queries such as:
• For each month within the past two years, list the manager whose product attracted most of my
investor’s accounts. (M1)
AIIA
MARKET Fiscal-CRM INVESTMENT
RESEARCH Data Warehouse RESEARCH
Statement ODS
ACCOUNT MANAGEMENT
to the technological infrastructure will continue to change as well. Addressing this change through
the implementation of an open-system, multi-tiered format is critical to the success of the data
warehouse. For example, one of the standard configurations for a Decision Support System (DSS)
application calls for a database server coupled with a “fat” client running a DSS presentation and
query tool that may or may not address back to an intermediary query processing server or
“engine”. However, AIIA opted for a newer standard to create applications based upon browser
type technologies to reduce the loads on the client workstations and provide open connectivity
to the data warehouse. This type of an application requires a Web server, a query engine and a
database server to/from the data warehouse, and it provides the computational component to the
client’s display device.
A three-tier data warehouse architecture was developed. Figure 6 illustrates the three-tier
architecture with the three shades of gray. The dark gray tier contains the presentation services in
which users will be able to access the data and these services include the interface to the users. The
middle tier contains the processing services in which large user requests and data manipulation are
executed. The light gray tier contains the data services in which the data is stored and maintained.
Fiscal-CRM
Data Warehouse
Data Server
Process
Application Server
Presentation
Laptop computer
Connected via the WEB
PC PC PC PC Using the Web
Currently, the AIIA data-warehousing system is used by the initial core of users. Most of these
initial users were, in some fashion, involved with the creation of the system. Therefore they were quite
familiar with the system from the inception, and they did not require formal training. Since the user
population is expected to grow significantly and expand outside the self-reliant core, one of the
pending tasks for AIIA is developing adequate end-user education and support strategy. Some
preliminary steps addressing that issue, such as developing educational-focused documentation,
have already been undertaken.
Another challenge facing the organization is maintaining the data warehouse and managing the
growth. Due to the fact that AIIA is a relatively new company in which the data warehouse was
developed in parallel with the operational systems, the likelihood for changes and additions to the
structure of the data warehouse underlying systems is higher than in the typical data-warehousing
project, where the data warehouse collects the data from mature systems. Consequently, the structural
changes in the data warehouse itself are probable. In acknowledgment of this fact, AIIA has delayed
the transition from the data-warehousing development team to the data-warehousing growth and
maintenance team. This transition will eventually involve downsizing the number of members devoted
to the project, and at this point AIIA feels that this step would be premature.
Finally, AIIA still has to evaluate the accomplishment of the clear missions for the warehouse,
set as detecting effective product and offerings and understanding the most promising revenue
opportunities, in order to make attaining an appropriate and justifiable ROI apparent. This evaluation
will be done gradually, as the system is used for the amount of time significant enough to evaluate its
impact (or non-impact).
498 Jukic & Neild
FURTHER READINGS
Adamson, C. & Venerable, M. (1998). Data Warehouse Design Solutions. NY: John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
Agosta, L. (2000). The Essential Guide to Data Warehousing. Prentice Hall.
Barquin, R. & Edelstein, H. (1997). Building, Using, and Managing the Data Warehouse. Prentice
Hall.
Bischoff, J. & Alexander, T. (1997). Data Warehouse: Practical Advice from the Experts. Prentice Hall.
Inmon, W.H. (1996). Building the Data Warehouse. NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Inmon, W.H., Welch, J.D., & Glassey, K.L. (1997). Managing The Data Warehouse. NY: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc.
Inmon, W.H., Rudin, K., Buss, C.K., & Sousa, R. (1999). Data Warehouse Performance. NY: John Wiley
& Sons, Inc.
Mattison R. (1996). Data Warehousing: Strategies, Technologies and Techniques. McGraw-Hill.
REFERENCES
Chaudhuri, S. & Dayal, U. (1997). An Overview of Data Warehousing and OLAP Technology.
SIGMOD Record, 26(1) 65-71.
Kimball, R., Reeves, L., Ross, M., & Thornthwaite, W. (1998). The Data Warehouse Lifecycle
Toolkit. NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
Labio, W., Yang, J., Cui, Y., Garcia-Molina, H., & Widom, J. (1999). Performance Issues in Incremental
Warehouse Maintenance. Technical Report, Stanford University.
Mattison, R. (1996). Data Warehousing: Strategies, Technologies and Techniques. McGraw Hill
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCHES
Nenad Jukic is an Assistant Professor at the Information Systems and Operations Management
Department of the School of Business Administration at Loyola University Chicago. He received
his BS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science from the University of Zagreb, Croatia. He
received his Master’s and Ph.D. degrees in Computer Science from the University of Alabama. His
research has focused on the areas of database management, e-business, data warehousing, and
systems integration.
Tania Neild is President and Director of Research and Technology at InfoGrate Incorporated,
a data integration tools and services provider. With a National Physical Science Consortium 6-Year
Full Doctorate Scholarship, she graduated from Northwestern University with a Ph.D. in Computer
Engineering, with a concentration in heterogeneous database integration. She earned her Master
of Computer Sciences from the University of Maryland where she concentrated in software
specification, and her BA from Emory University, majoring in mathematics and computer science.