Hello
@Manish Kumar we had considered this Out of the Box match score capability for our installation at Schneider Electric. Here is how it works:
> for each match rule in your tenant you assign a 'Standalone' (sort of 'primary') score and a 'Incremental' score (sort of 'secondary')
> both those score are pure numeric score (they are not brought back to % for example). e.g. Match rule 1 could have a 'standalone' score of 90, and an 'Incremental' score of 30; and Match rule 2 has 'standalone' score 60, and 'Incremental' score 20.
> let's take an example where a potential match of record A and B is proposed and triggered 2 potential match rule 1 and match rule 2.
> Match Rule 1: 'standalone' score = 90 and 'incremental' score = 30
> Match Rule 2: 'standalone' score = 60 and 'incremental' score = 20
> Note those scores are to be decided by your team
> for potential match pair A&B, one of the two match rule will be considered the prevailing one; in this case the potential match will get the 'standalone'
score of the prevailing match rule; and for the 2nd match rule capturing this pair, the 'incremental' score will be taken into account
> so, in our example, the potential match will get 90 + 20 = 110 points
> after considering this functionality, we decided that for our need it was not bringing much value since it only aggregates 2 scores, without system of weighting, or a % which would indicate the level of accuracy of the potential match; so we decided not to implement it.
> instead we are currently in the process of implementing the relevance based score match, which is another functionality which does a much better job at indicating to what level a potential match can be considered as reliable.
hope it helps.
------------------------------
Loictordo
Global customer master data director
Schneider Electric
------------------------------