Blog · Data quality and reconciliation
How to score CRM data quality from the export rather than from complaints: five fields that every coverage and pipeline measure depends on, owner, close date, stage, activity date and account identifier, the check for each, the completeness and validity rate per rep, why the score is reported beside the measures that depend on it, and the rule that a measure computed on data under a stated score is shown greyed.
A coverage report says a rep is at 91 percent. The rep's CRM records have owners on half the accounts and activity dates on a third. The 91 percent is a measure of the third. This guide sets out a data quality score from the export, per rep, and the rule that puts it beside every measure that depends on it.
| Field | Completeness | Validity |
|---|---|---|
| Account owner | Filled | Is a current rep in the roster |
| Close date | Filled on open deals | Not in the past |
| Stage | Filled | Consistent with age: not in discovery after 200 days |
| Last activity date | Filled | Within the account's tier cadence |
| Account identifier | Filled | Exists in the ledger or the customer master |
Per rep:
Score = records passing all applicable checks ÷ records
Per field: the pass rate, so the rep and the manager see which field is the problem.
Identifiers only.
A measure computed on a rep's data with a score under the stated floor is shown greyed, with the score beside it.
Coverage, pipeline coverage, time to first touch, untouched accounts: all of them. The floor is on the report; seventy percent is a common starting point.
| Rep | Records | Owner | Close date | Stage | Activity | Identifier | Score | Measures |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R-04 | 93 | 100% | 61% | 84% | 38% | 96% | 41% | Greyed |
| R-11 | 66 | 100% | 94% | 97% | 88% | 100% | 86% | Shown |
| R-17 | 32 | 100% | 100% | 100% | 91% | 100% | 91% | Shown |
Rep R-04's activity dates are missing on two thirds of accounts. Their coverage figure is computed on the third that have them, and it is greyed until the score passes the floor. The manager's conversation is about the field, not the coverage.
Per team: the score, and the share of the team's revenue sitting under greyed measures. A region where forty percent of revenue is under greyed measures has a data problem before it has a coverage problem, and the report says so first.
Team score only. The rep at 41 inside the 78.
Measures shown at full confidence on bad data. Ninety-one percent coverage of a third of the book.
Validity skipped. Fields filled with yesterday's date to pass completeness.
Score hidden from reps. The behaviour does not change; the report stays grey.
Mapped once, the CRM exports, the roster and the ledger produce the ten checks, the score per rep and per field, and the greying rule on every dependent measure every week. Covirage builds this from the exports as they are. The metrics governance solution describes the setup, and the pipeline hygiene guide covers the opportunity-level checks in more depth.
Because data quality is a behaviour, and the export shows whose. A team score of 78 percent is one rep at 40 and the rest at 90. The rep at 40 is a conversation, and their coverage figure is not to be trusted until it happens.
Hidden measures get asked about. A greyed measure with the score beside it says: this is the number, and it rests on data that is 40 percent complete. The reader decides how much to believe it, and the rep knows why it is grey.
That is the company's choice. What the score does is make the dependency visible: a rep whose coverage looks good on 40 percent complete data has not been measured. Whether that changes pay is a policy question; whether it changes the report is not.