Digital transformation stories often focus on platforms deployed or systems retired. Far less attention is paid to the moment when resistance surfaces—and leaders are forced to rethink not the technology, but their approach. As leaders, we must also understand that every enterprise data transformation eventually reaches a moment of reckoning. Not when the architecture is designed or the platform is selected—but when people push back.
During an open discussion, one such question cut to the heart of modern data leadership: Can you recall a data or analytics initiative where obstacles forced you to change course—and how you carried your team through it?
One example that stands out is a Master Data transformation, that I led, involving 9 million records, over 40,000 users with legacy systems. At that time, our systems were siloed, data was fragmented, priorities were not aligned, and teams worked separately instead of together. There was no single source of truth, which made reporting and digital / AI initiatives very difficult.
We delivered the program in three waves:
•First, we built the core platform.
•Second, we moved engineering parts and retired the old legacy systems.
•Third,we migrated complex domains like Suppliers, Customers, HR, Applications, and Finance data. The new MDM system became the central source for all critical master data.
The biggest challenge was not technology—it was culture. Teams were used to old tools and old ways of working. With scattered data and unclear ownership, there was fear of losing control. I changed my approach by being more transparent, involving teams in designing workflows, and showing early wins. Slowly, resistance dropped and alignment improved.
By the end, we had a clear plan to retire major legacy systems, decommission 20+ old applications, and consolidate more than 70 master data objects into one secure platform. This gave the organization a reliable, trusted source of truth across Finance, HR, Engineering, and Customer functions.
When I reflect on this transformation journey, I see three core leadership qualities that guided us. They closely mirror the timeless lessons from the Mahabharata, where Lord Krishna advises Arjun on how to act in difficult situations. These values are Dharma, Dharya, and Saahas.
1. Truthfulness, or Dharma, is not just about being right; it is about being selfless while making decisions. In the Mahabharata, Dharma means placing the greater good above personal or functional interests. In our journey, this meant leading with a clear vision, being honest about why change was needed, and taking decisions that benefited the organization as a whole, not individual teams. This selfless approach built trust and alignment.
2. Patience, or Dharya, was equally critical. Teams needed time and reassurance as they moved away from long-standing systems and habits. By delivering the program in phases and focusing on early wins, we allowed people to adapt steadily. Dharya reminded us that meaningful change cannot be rushed.
3. Courage, or Saahas, enabled us to take tough calls—engaging business leaders early, breaking silos, and insisting on shared ownership even when there was resistance. Like in the Mahabharata, Saahas is the strength to act despite uncertainty.
Together, Dharma, Dharya, and Saahas helped us move from fragmented systems to a unified source of truth and a more aligned organization