Case Study · Pharma
~60%

Data quality incidents cut by roughly 60 percent across 26 regulated markets

The Situation

A European pharmaceutical distribution business fed its central warehouse from source systems across 26 markets. Every market had its own systems, formats, and habits.

Bad data flowed downstream and was discovered where it costs the most: in management reporting and in submissions that regulators read. Each incident meant tracing the error back through the pipeline by hand.

Why it was hard

01

In a regulated business, a reporting error is not an inconvenience, it is exposure. The cost of a data quality incident scales with how far downstream it travels before someone catches it.

02

Twenty six markets could not be forced onto one source system. The fix had to accept messy inputs and still guarantee clean outputs.

What Was Built

STEP 01

A single data quality gateway between all source systems and the warehouse: every record passes through validation before it can land.

STEP 02

Failures are caught at the gate, quarantined, and reported to the owning market with the reason attached, so fixes happen at the source instead of downstream.

STEP 03

Quality became a measured, visible metric per market instead of an assumption.

The Results

~60%
Reduction in data quality incidents
26 markets
Source systems unified behind one quality gate
At the gate
Errors caught before reporting and regulatory submissions

What This Means For You

Most AI programs fail on exactly this: data nobody downstream can trust. If you are about to build AI on top of messy, multi-source data, find out now whether it will hold. That is the first thing the audit checks.

Not sure where you stand? Take the free AI Readiness Calculator →