My concern regarding data quality is largely that it is absent.

The solution compiles, tests run, the users like the UI, job done. The reporting/BI aspect is someone elses problem.

Only it's NOT! For data to be an asset rather than a liability you have to build sufficient domain/referential integrity in as a foundation stone. It matters not whether it is NoSQL, flat files or RDBMS. If a NoSQL document needs to be a certain structure then how is that enforced? If attributes within the documents have rules defining legitemate values how are those enforced?

I worry that some of the development community are jumping on the band waggon of NoSQL simply because they are trying to bypass the disciplines that DBAs insist on without understanding why those disciplines are so important.

If you've been to any Big Data conferences you will come away thinking "but that's been my day job for 'x' years! Big Data is just a marketing term!".

Yes and No. The reason something so old has only just been given a marketing term is because non-IT and non-data professionals are now sitting up and taking notice of data and recognising its intrinsic worth. Up until now that audience has played lip service to topics surrounding "data as an asset" without really believing it.

Now they are realising they could make serious money out of data the light-bulbs have gone on only to find that the ancient curse of SHISHO is still as potent today as it was to our ancestors.

I may be data Santa Claus but what I can deliver on the stale mince pies of data quality and astringent brandy of technical debt is a rather nasty smell.