Services for Organizations

Using our research, best practices and expertise, we help you understand how to optimize your business processes using applications, information and technology. We provide advisory, education, and assessment services to rapidly identify and prioritize areas for improvement and perform vendor selection

Consulting & Strategy Sessions

Ventana On Demand

    Services for Investment Firms

    We provide guidance using our market research and expertise to significantly improve your marketing, sales and product efforts. We offer a portfolio of advisory, research, thought leadership and digital education services to help optimize market strategy, planning and execution.

    Consulting & Strategy Sessions

    Ventana On Demand

      Services for Technology Vendors

      We provide guidance using our market research and expertise to significantly improve your marketing, sales and product efforts. We offer a portfolio of advisory, research, thought leadership and digital education services to help optimize market strategy, planning and execution.

      Analyst Relations

      Demand Generation

      Product Marketing

      Market Coverage

      Request a Briefing

        David Menninger's Analyst Perspectives

        << Back to Blog Index

        Semantic Models Benefit Analytical Processes

        I’ve never been a fan of talking about semantic models because most of the workforce probably doesn’t understand what they are, or doesn’t recognize them by name. But the findings in our recent Analytics and Data Benchmark Research have changed my mind. The research shows how important a semantic model can be to the success of data and analytics processes. Organizations that have successfully implemented a semantic model are more than twice as likely to report satisfaction with analytics (77%) compared with a 33% overall satisfaction rate. Therefore, I owe it to all of you to write about them.

        So, let’s start with a definition. A semantic model is a way to describe the organization of a set of information, including the relationships within that information set. I deliberately chose to use the term “information” here instead of “data.” I also chose to define “semantic model” not “semantic data model.” The reason for that distinction is because of the importance of metrics and other types of information which are derived from the raw data set. For a semantic model to be truly useful, it must include the calculated pieces of information that are critical to understanding any organization’s operations.

        Creating and sharing a semantic model within an organization provides a way to make sure everyone understands and agrees on the definitions included in the model. It’s important to understand that the semantic model is a logical or conceptual model. It can be implemented as a physical model using a variety of technologies. One of the most common ways a semantic model for analytics process is implemented is using a relational database. Nearly three-quarters (72%) of organizations report using relational databases as the data platform for analytics processes, making it the most popular alternative.

        But it is very difficult to capture and express an organization’s entire semantic model in relational technology. Specifically, it is difficult to express interrow calculations in relational technology – for example, interest expense as a function of the prior period outstanding loan balance. Or a much more complicated example, the net present value of a future stream of cash flows. You might be able to express some of these concepts, but it’s not what the relational model was designed for and it’s not easy.

        More likely, you would implement the calculations of your semantic model in an analytics engine. I’ll use this term to include business intelligence products, online analytical processing engines, planning products and other similar technologies that have ways to express a variety of calculations. These would include artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies as well. Given the proliferation of AI/ML models, it is important for organizations to capture the outputs of these models, too.

        Organizations that have successfully implemented a semantic model/layer:

        • Are significantly more satisfied with analytics (77% compared with 33% overall)
        • Have more of the workforce engaged in analytics (43% compared with 23% have more than one-half the workforce using analytics)
        • Find analytics capabilities completely adequate (62% vs. 33% overall)
        • Say data governance capabilities are completely adequate (51% vs. 25% overall)
        • Are more comfortable with self-service: (54% very comfortable vs. 14% overall)

        Those are significant differences. I have to include the standard caution that correlation is not necessarily causation. However, whether it is causation or not, it appears to be a best practice among those organizations that are succeeding in analytics efforts.

        One of the challenges of managing a semantic model is that it is likely be implemented in a combination of technologies. Most likely, some portion of the model is implemented in a relational database. Then one or more analytics engines are used to implement some of the calculated portions of the model. Semantic model definitions should be captured as part of an organization’s data catalog. The data catalog is a natural place to capture and share this information. Unfortunately, most data and analytics technology vendors have implemented their own catalogs and there is not yet enough integration among them. In fact, we assert that through 2024, more than one-half of all organizations will continue to utilize multiple data catalog technologies, a choice that leads to silos of information knowledge.

        So, let’s start talking about semantic models more often. They appear to have a positive effect on the success of an organization’s data and analytics processes. There is still more work to do on capturing and sharing semantic models across data and analytics technology boundaries, but that shouldn’t stop organizations from embracing semantic models today.


        David Menninger


        David Menninger
        Executive Director, Technology Research

        David Menninger leads technology software research and advisory for Ventana Research, now part of ISG. Building on over three decades of enterprise software leadership experience, he guides the team responsible for a wide range of technology-focused data and analytics topics, including AI for IT and AI-infused software.


        Analyst Perspective Policy

        • Ventana Research’s Analyst Perspectives are fact-based analysis and guidance on business, industry and technology vendor trends. Each Analyst Perspective presents the view of the analyst who is an established subject matter expert on new developments, business and technology trends, findings from our research, or best practice insights.

          Each is prepared and reviewed in accordance with Ventana Research’s strict standards for accuracy and objectivity and reviewed to ensure it delivers reliable and actionable insights. It is reviewed and edited by research management and is approved by the Chief Research Officer; no individual or organization outside of Ventana Research reviews any Analyst Perspective before it is published. If you have any issue with an Analyst Perspective, please email them to

        View Policy

        Subscribe to Email Updates

        Posts by Month

        see all

        Posts by Topic

        see all

        Analyst Perspectives Archive

        See All