Begin with the trust problem
A blockchain should not be selected because data is important. It should be considered when several organizations or systems need to rely on a shared history, ownership is distributed and reconciliation or tampering creates meaningful risk.
Where a trusted central authority already exists and performs well, a conventional database may be simpler and more effective.
Strong use cases have identifiable boundaries
Credible applications include asset provenance, component histories, chain of custody, supply-chain assurance and controlled multi-party exchange.
The value comes from improving trust, auditability and coordination—not from replacing every existing system.
Architecture still matters
Blockchain does not secure inaccurate source data, eliminate identity management or solve integration by itself. The design must address who writes records, how identities are verified, what remains off-chain and how sensitive information is protected.
A practical architecture often combines distributed records with conventional storage, analytics and access controls.
Use a decision test
Ask whether multiple parties need the same record, whether they distrust a single owner, whether the history must be tamper-evident and whether the added governance and integration are justified.
If several of those conditions are absent, blockchain may add complexity without enough operational benefit.