---
title: "If data is part of engineering, do we need data contracts?"
date: 2024-02-19
categories: ["Data Contracts","Data Platform"]
source: https://andrew-jones.com/daily/2024-02-19-if-data-is-part-of-engineering-do-we-need-data-contracts/
---

# If data is part of engineering, do we need data contracts?

David Jayatillake published an interesting post recently titled "[We don't need data contracts](https://davidsj.substack.com/p/we-dont-need-data-contracts)". The title was enough to ensure it caught plenty of attention... but the subtitle more accurately describes what David is arguing for: "We need data to be part of product engineering".

I agree!

If data applications are supporting key business process, driving ML models that power product features, then they should be built in the same way, and with the same *discipline*, that product engineering use for their services.

And of course, data should be owned by the team who produces it.

My goal with data contracts was always a way to facilitate a move to this model, without changing the organisation structure first.

That's why [my book](https://data-contracts.com) talks mostly about that, and much less on the technology.

Even with the perfect org structure, there is still a need for [an interface](https://andrew-jones.com/daily/2023-12-08-the-importance-of-interfaces/) to access the data.

Often that would be a table in a data warehouse, with historical data, because the people consuming this data are often using tools like dbt or SQL-based analytic tools like Looker.

And that's the interface that can be [driven by a data contract](https://andrew-jones.com/daily/2023-12-01-a-contract-based-data-platform/).