A Corporate Information Management Framework for the … · 2017-10-03 · Academic CIMF V1.4 23rd June 2016 1 A Corporate Information Management Framework for the European Public

AcademicCIMFV1.423rdJune2016

1

ACorporateInformationManagementFrameworkfortheEuropeanPublicSectorDeclanDeasy,formerlyEuropeanCommission,[email protected],[email protected],EuropeanCommission,[email protected]

AbstractThis paper proposes a framework for Corporate Information Management (CIMF) tailored for theEuropeanpublic Sector.TheCIMF isbasedona structured,holistic setofprincipleswhichencompassthedifferentphasesof the information lifecycle.Theseprinciplesstressthe importanceof informationas a critical public assetand focus on how information should be generated, managed, shared,protectedandpreserved.Theapproachemphasisesthenecessitytoestablish, implementandmanagethis framework at the corporate level. The framework has been influenced byreferences foundingovernmental policies from theUK, New Zealand, Australia, Estonia, USA, and Canada as well as anumberofotheracademicandpractitionersources.Foreachprinciplebothobjectives(i.e.whatistobeachieved)andenablers/action types (how to achieve the objectives) are presented. It is argued thatadopting and promulgating this framework at a corporate level in European public administrationswould be a paradigm shift in information management for the European public sector and wouldprovidethebasisforaveritablerevolutioninhowpublicadministrationsmanageinformation.


2

1. IntroductionFast, reliable access to relevant information for better decision-making has been one of the primarydrivers of successive waves of computerization in the public sector from early mainframes throughnetworks,PCs,theInternet,theWebtotoday’scloudcomputinganddigitalservices.Thishasresultednot just in a rich portfolio of information systems across governments (including policy support,administrative and office systems), but also in the emergence of digitally literate staff with highexpectations of their organisations’s information systems. Since the 1960s, technology has had thecapacitytotransformthewaywecreate,share,process,exploit,disseminate,preserveandprotecttheinformation stored in these systems. As new technologies have emerged, these capacities haveexpandedtothepointwheremanyorganisationsstruggletocopewiththesheervolumeofdatatheycreate,gather,processandstore.In addition to this general challenge, information systems in public administrations around theworldsuffer from two particular problemswhich,while not unique to the public sector, are certainlymoresignificant in that sector. These problems are siloisation and lack of interoperability. Although localcollaborative initiatives exist and progress has been made on internal integration using technologiessuchasEnterpriseResourcePlanning(ERP)systems,bothsilosystemswith littledatasharingorreuseanddatastoredinlocalfilesystemspersistinallpublicadministrations.Silosandlackofinteroperabilityare the norm especially when the situation across different departments, agencies and ministries isanalysed. The situation is even worse when it comes to cross-border exchanges of information andservices.Theseproblemshindertheavailabilityof informationatthecorporatelevelandtheseamlessdelivery of modern digital services. For many years the challenge has been to better manage thisinformationinfrastructure/ecosysteminaholisticwayatthecorporatelevelsoastomaximiseitsvalueforboththecitizenandthestate.ItisachallengesharedbyallorganisationsinthepublicsectorwhichisreflectedinthemodernisationagendasofmostEUMemberStatepublicadministrationswherethereisawidespreadrealisationthatthepotentialforleveragingeachadministration’sinformationtocreatenewdigitalpublicserviceshasnotyetbeenfullyexploited.Therearenumerouspotentialbenefitstoberealisedfrombetterinformationmanagementinthepublicsector,forexamplein:• evidencebasedpolicyanddecisionmaking;• innovationandcreationofnewdigitalpublicservices;• knowledgemanagementandtheretentionofcorporatememory;• increasedtrustingovernment’smanagementofcitizendata;• daytodayefficientoperationofthepublicsector;• deliveryofappropriatelevelsoftransparencybothinternallyandexternally;• collaborativeworkingwithinandacrossGovernmentdepartments;• co-creationbetweenthepublicsectorandcitizens,communitygroupsandtheprivatesector;• cooperationandcoordinationacrosstheEuropeanUnion;• minimisingtheriskofnon-compliancewithregulations;• managingthecostsofcollection,storageandsecuringofinformation.Thechallengeistodevelopasuitableframeworkforbettermanagementofthisinformation.Thepaperoffersoneapproach.


3

1.1 TerminologyThewords‘data’and‘information’areoftenusedinterchangeablyalthoughtheymeandifferentthings(Ackoff1989).Furthermore,theyhavedifferentmeaningstopeopleworkingindifferentdisciplines(e.g.archivists,datascientists,statisticians,documentmanagementexpertsandsoon).Dataarecommonlydefined as elementary objective facts. Individual data items are discrete and oftenmeasurable. Datamay or may not have meaning in isolation. Traditionally the data captured and stored in computersystemshavebeenalmostexclusivelytextualornumeric,butincreasinglyotherformsofdataarebeingcapturedandstored(e.g.video,audio,picturesandimages).Informationisheredefinedasdataplacedinacontextwhichcreatesmeaning.Thismaybeassimpleascombiningtwodatasetsorascomplicatedasplacingitinapoliticalscenario.Bothdataandinformationmay be stored and manipulated digitally in lightly structured documentary systems and/or highlystructureddata systems.Thegrowthofbothuseand storageofunstructured informationhasbeenatrendduringrecentyears.For ease of reading, throughout this paper the word information will be used to encompass bothinformationanddata.Theword‘data’willbeusedonlywherespecificallyrequiredbythecontext.

2. TheEuropeanbackgroundWithin the EuropeanUnion (EU) the so-called “Information Society” has been an important driver ofeconomicandsocialprogresssincethepublicationoftheBangemannReportin1994.SincethentheEUhasbeenputtinginplacethelegalandpolicyframeworktosupporttheemergingInformationSociety.As this supportive framework becomesmore complex, the need for sound and effective informationmanagementintheMemberStates'publicadministrationsincreases.While there are many detailed aspects to this legal and policy framework, the following are salientelementsofit:1. The EU Lisbon Treaty (Official Journal 2008) enables support from the Union for the efforts of

Member States to improve their administrative capacity to implementUnion lawby facilitatingtheexchangeofinformationamongstthem.

2. The EU Charter on Fundamental Rights (Official Journal of the European Parliament 2000)

introducestherightofeverycitizentoaccessdatathathasbeencollectedconcerningherorhimand, if it is inaccurate or incomplete, the right to have it corrected. Where such data areinappropriatelyheld,citizenshavetorighttorequestthattheybedeleted.Inlinewiththisright,highlydevelopeddataprotectionregulationsarenowinplaceacrosstheEU.Thecoreunderlyinglegislation is Regulation (EU) 2016/679 (repealing Directive 95/46/EC) and Directive (EU)2016/680which regulate the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing ofpersonaldataandthefreemovementofsuchdata. Implemented innational laws,theDirectiveappliestoallEUMemberStatesaswellastoIceland,LiechtensteinandNorway.

3. The revisedPublic Sector InformationDirective (European Commission 2013) encourages public

sectorbodiestomakedata/information,togetherwiththerelevantmetadata,publiclyavailable.The Directive requires that this be done in both open and machine-readable formats, at the


4

lowestfeasiblelevelofprecisionandgranularityandinformatsthatensureinteroperability.Itisworth noting that there is a potential for conflict between this and the preceding directive –particularlygiventhegrowingpowerofmoderndataanalytics(BarocasandNissenbaum2014).This creates somespecific challenges for informationsecuritymanagementwhicharediscussedbelow.

4. Since 2000 there has been a series of EU Ministerial declarations on eGovernment and

eGovernmentActionPlanscomplementedbytheEuropeanCommission’sinternale-Commissioninitiative. Their common objective is the effective and cost efficient exploitation of digitaltechnologiestotransformpublicadministrationsandtodeliveruser-centricdigitalpublicservices(EuropeanUnion2009;EuropeanCommission2010b;EuropeanCommission2012).ThelatestEueGovernment Action Plan 2016-2020 (adopted in April 2016) aims to accelerate the digitaltransformation of government. Interoperability and de-siloisation are key success factors fortheseplans.

5. TheEuropeanCommissionexplicitlypromotesinteroperabilityandhasfacilitatedEuropeanpublic

services and the exchange of information between the EUMember States since themid-1990swithaseriesofprogrammesnamely:

• Theelectronicinterchangeofdatabetweenadministrations(IDA/IDAI/IDAII);• Interoperable Delivery of Pan-European eGovernment Services to Public Administrations,

BusinessandCitizens(IDABC)and• InteroperabilitySolutionsforEuropeanPublicAdministrations(ISA)The ISA programme (2010-2015) (European Commission 2015) has already delivered importantresults (Bovalis et al 2014) including interoperability frameworks, reference architectures, datastandards (Peristeras 2013) and maturity models (European Commission 2010a; EuropeanCommission 2011; European Commission 2015c; IDBAC 2010). Thisworkwill continuewith theISA2Programme(2016-2020)(EuropeanCommission2015b).

6. The recently published Digital Single Market policy (European Commission 2015d) defines

prioritiesforinteroperabilityandstandardsinareascriticaltothedigitalsinglemarket,suchase-health, transportplanningandenergy.Moreover, anewe-governmentactionplanwill connectbaseregistersacrossEuropeandensureeaseofinformationexchangebetweendifferentnationalsystems and authentic data sources. Businesses and citizens should only have to communicatetheirdataoncetopublicadministrations(thisissometimesreferredtoastheonce-onlystrategy).

7. More generally the European Council has repeatedly emphasised in recent years the need formodernisingmemberstates’publicadministrationsaspartoftheStructuralReformsessentialforjobs,growthandinvestment.TheEuropeanCommissioninitsAnnualGrowthSurvey2015calledfor improvedefficiency inpublic administrations emphasising the challengeof “adapting to theneeds of the digital economy” and recommending “a more digital approach to publicadministration”(EuropeanCommission2014,p14)

TheimplementationofthesepoliciesintheEUMemberStateshasturnedouttobemoredifficultthanexpected,especiallyatEuropeanlevel.Itimpliescrossdepartmentprojects,increasedcollaborationandknowledge sharing, an emphasis on transparency and data exchangeswith the EU institutions, otherstates, international organisations, citizens and businesses. However siloisation and lack of


5

interoperabilityremainremarkablydifficulttoeradicate.Analysisofthedifficultiesinovercomingthemhas led to the insight (ifnotepiphany) thatprogressatboth transnational andnational level in thesedomainsispredicatedonbetterinformationmanagementespeciallyatcorporatelevels.Thiscreatestheneedforasuitableuniversalframework.

3. StateoftheartoninformationmanagementframeworksThe concept of an information management framework as envisaged in this paper appears under anumberofdifferentguises includingcorporateinformationmanagement(CIM),enterpriseinformationmanagement (EIM) and even enterprise architecture. Van de Lans and van Til (2012, p80) defineenterpriseinformationmanagementas:“… an integrative discipline for structuring, describing and governing information assets acrossorganizationaland technologyboundaries to improveefficiency,promote transparency, supportagilityandenablebusinessinsight.”TheCIM/EIMconceptgoesbackseveraldecades.AnearlytextonthistopicisbyJackson(1986).Morerecently,anumberofbooksonEIMhavebeenpublishedmanyofwhicharerelatedtospecificproducts(suchasSAP),technologies(suchastheInternet)ortopics(suchascontent)(see,forexample,BragueandChamplin2014;Jenkins2012;vomBrockeandSimons2013).Ideassuchastreatinginformationasanassetandtheneedforgooddataandinformationgovernancehavelongbeenunderstood(see,forexample,MoodyandWalsh1999;Brynjolfsson1994;Glazer1993;Kopperetal2011;EIU2008;KhatriandBrown2010;Sarsfield2009).Various frameworks and definitions have been proposed over the years mostly emphasising theinformationtechnologyaspectsofinformationmanagement.Theycontaincertaincommonfeaturesorcomponentssuchasdatamanagementandsecurity,butinotherwaystheycanbequitediverseintheirunderstanding of what comprises EIM. For example, until recently little priority was given topreservationordataprotectionissues.AstudybyHausmannetal(2014)reviewedthecurrentstateofEIMreadinessinanumberofcountries(thoughprimarily inAustralia).Theauthors reportedthat less than35%of respondentssaid that theynow have an EIM strategy in place. Another recent survey by the Gartner Group (Geragas 2015)reportedsimilarfindings.ItconfirmedthatEnterpriseInformationManagement(EIM)andMasterDataManagement(MDM)aremovingupthecorporateagendaalthoughlessthan5%offirmssurveyedhavefully deployed multi domain operational solutions. Gartner's conclusion, that successful enterpriseinformation management requires "a political power shift …and …a deliberate and architectedapproach” in organisations, underlines the need for a framework for information management atcorporatelevel.Recent research commissionedbyBT Ireland (Amárach2016), in revealing thegrowing importanceofdataatboard levelhasconfirmedthistrend: “Astechnologytransformsbusinessesglobally, it isclearthatdatamanagement,specificallyhowdata isusedandsecured isgoingtobecrucial forcompanies,theirinvestorsandshareholdersalike”(Walsh2016).This realisation that datamanagement is key tomeeting the challenges of the digital revolution hasbeen articulated at the highest political level with the call by the President of Estonia to add a Fifth


6

Freedom - the FreeMovement of Data - to the Four Fundamental Freedoms of the single market -People,Goods, Capital and Services - enshrined in the European Treaties.Datamust be able to crossbordersbutthefreemovementofdataisnotjustaboutcommerce-"itmustbecomeanabidingvalueoftheinternalmarket"(AddressbyPresidentIlvestotheEuropeanParliament,2February2016).The situation in the public sector regarding informationmanagement is broadly similar to that in theprivate sector. Many countries, dissatisfied with the return on IT investments in their publicadministrationsandfacedwithincreasingexpectationsfordigitalpublicservices,havebeguntoaddressthe issues surrounding information management in the public sector. Doing this implies a need fornationalframeworksforpolicyformulationandexecutionintheinformationmanagementdomain.Nosuchframeworksexistatthemoment.Ananalysisofthepoliciesofsixcountries–theUK,theUSA,NewZealand, Australia, Canada and Estonia - has revealed common themes and preoccupations whichshouldbeaddressedinsuchaframework.Allofthesecountriesrecogniseinformationasanassetthatshouldbemanagedandshared.Theyemphasise,invaryingdegrees,theneedforinformationtobefitforpurposeandmeetbusinessneeds,tobetrustedandauthoritativeandtobereusable. Informationshould be open, accessible, easy to discover and easy to use. Preoccupations found in each of thesecountries include the necessity for information to be standardised and linkable, readily available,protected, reasonably priced and accessible in an appropriatemanner. All six emphasise governance,guidelinesandtrainingascriticaltosuccessfullyimplementinginformationmanagement.The European Commission is addressing someof these issues through the ISA Programme (EuropeanCommission 2014b) which promotes interoperability amongst the EU member states and the EUinstitutions.Inthiscontext,severalresultsoftheprogramme(Bovalisetal2014)contributetoimprovedinformationmanagement.Theseinclude:• The European Interoperability Framework (EIF) which provides the basis for developing

interoperableEuropeanpublicservices(EuropeanCommission2010a);

• The European Interoperability Reference Architecture, which is a blueprint to be used whendesigninginteroperablesystems(EuropeanCommission2011);

• The development of horizontal data standards (Core Vocabularies) to support cross-domainexchangeofinformationandopendatapolicies(Peristeras2013);

• WorkintheareaofBaseRegistriestoensurethatpublicadministrationmasterdataismanagedinacoherentwayandbecomesavailableforreusebythewholeadministrativeecosystem;

• Maturity and assessmentmodels for interoperability and standards like the CommonAssessmentMethodforSpecificationsandStandardsandtheInteroperabilityMaturityModel;

• Joinup – ISA’s collaborative platform where public administrations businesses and citizens share

interoperability solutions, including open source software and semantic assets (seewww.joinup.ec.europa.eu).

Thiswork is undertakenwith the EUMember States andwill be continued through to 2020with theISA2programmeadopted inNovember2015 (Decision (EU)2015/2240)andestablishingaprogrammeoninteroperabilitysolutionsandcommonframeworksforEuropeanpublicadministrations,businesses


7

andcitizensasameansformodernisingthepublicsector.The US Government also has a programme to ensure information interoperability in the context ofnational security. The responsible agency, the Information Sharing Environment(ISE), has recentlypublishedtoolsincluding:• DARA – Data Aggregation Reference Architecture designed to address shortfalls in data

interoperability,aggregationandcorrelation(ISE2014);• GIRA - Geospatial Interoperability Reference Architecture leverages open standards to improve

informationsharingprimarilyofgeospatialinformation(ISE2015a);• ISE Interoperability Framework – a start-up guide that makes tools and resources available to

governmentandtheprivatesectorforimprovinginformationinteroperability(ISE2015b).ThesetoolsprimarilyfacilitateinformationsharingonsecuritymattersacrossUSgovernmentagenciesandunderscoretheneedforanallembracingoverarchingframeworkforinformationmanagement.Insummarywhilethereismuchongoingworkoninformationmanagementandtherearebroadareasof commonality in its conceptualisation, there is noone agreed framework.Nonetheless, informationmanagementisrecognisedasanincreasinglyimportantchallengebothintheprivateandpublicsectors.Inalmostallcasesithasnotyetbeenadequatelyaddressedparticularlyatcorporatelevel–infactonecould,toborrowacolloquialexpression,saythatitisanelephantinthecornerofthecorporatesuite.Theneedforacorporateframeworkforinformationmanagementisclearandunambiguous.

4. ACorporateInformationManagementFramework(CIMF)Drawingontheactionsoutlinedaboveandthecurrentstateoftheartof informationmanagement inthe public and private sectors a Corporate InformationManagement Framework (CIMF) is presented.The framework identifies and is developed around a structured set of six principles based on theinformation life cycle. It adopts a corporate and holistic view of informationmanagement for publicadministrationssimilartothedisciplineofEnterpriseInformationManagementdiscussedinthecontextof private organisations TheCIMFproposes an important change in current public sector informationmanagementpracticesnamelymovingfrommicroandad-hocmanagementatthelocal leveldesignedto optimise local functions and services to corporate and holistic information asset managementdesigned to achieve global organisational objectives. This transition is not trivial and constitutes aparadigm shift in how many public organisations in the EU currently perceive, manage and exploitinformation.The figurebelowpresentsahigh-levelviewof the frameworkasa structuredsetofprinciplesaroundthephasesofinformationlifecycle.


8

Figure1:ACorporateInformationManagementFramework(CIMF)TheCIMFconsistsoftheprinciplessetoutinthefollowingtable.Principle1:PublicSectorInformationisapublicassetheldintrustforcitizens.PublicAdministrationshaveanobligationtoensurethatinformationretainedbythepublicsectorisaccurate,integral,protected,accessibleanduptodateatalltimes.Principle2:Informationshouldbegeneratedtoaidpolicyformulationandtosupportpolicyexecutionusingstandardisedformatsandexploitingbothinternalandexternalsources.Principle3:Informationshouldbemanagedsoastomaximiseitsrelevancetogoodpublicadministrationandthecreationofpublicvalueapplying‘once-only’strategieswhereappropriate.Principle4:Informationshouldbesharedinwaysthatmakeiteasyto(re)use,deliverandexchangeanditshouldbemadeavailablethroughmultiplechannels.Principle5:InformationshouldbeprotectedasprescribedbyboththeEUandnationallegalcodesaswellaspublicadministrations’dataprivacyandITsecuritypolicies.Principle6: Informationshouldbepreservedtoensurecontinuedaccess foras longas isappropriate inaccordancewithnationaland international legal, regulatoryandarchival requirements. Information which is unlikely to serve any future publicpurposeshouldbedeleted.


9

These principles are discussed inmore detail below. For each principle the rationale underlying thatprincipleisdiscussed,associatedobjectives(what)arepresentedandtheenablers(how)toachievetheobjectives are identified. These objectives and enablers allow the implementation of the CIMF to betailoredtoanadministration’sspecificneedsandrequirements.Somehighlevelobjectivesarecommontoseveralprinciplesbuttheemphasisandactionstoachievethemwillbedifferentineachcase.4.1 Principle1:InformationisanAssetPublic Sector Information is a public asset held in trust for citizens. Public Administrations have anobligation to ensure that information retained by the public sector is accurate, integral, protected,accessibleanduptodateatalltimes.Adefiningcharacteristicofpublicsectorinformationisthatitisheldintrustforthecitizens.Itisapublicasset. It is worth noting that this principle has not always been accepted in all areas. Even todaygovernment agencies sometimes regard their information as proprietary. It is also worth noting thatwhile thisprinciple states that all public informationbelongs to thepublic, it is a collective rightwithassociatedresponsibilitiesparticularlyconcerningaccess;itdoesnotmeanthatallcitizenshavearighttoseeallinformation.This principle is inspired by similar overarching propositions enunciated by several countries forexample:Country CommentNewZealand(ICT.gov.nz2015)

“DataandInformationheldandownedbygovernmenteffectivelybelongtotheNewZealandpublic;areacorestrategicassetheldbygovernmentasastewardonbehalfofthepublic;andshouldonlybecollectedorgeneratedforspecificpublicpolicy,operationalbusinessorlegislativepurposes.”

Australia(VictorianGovernment2011,p2)

“Informationassetsarecriticaltodecisionmakingandservicedeliveryingovernment”

UK(TheNationalArchives2015)

“Informationisanassetwhichisfundamentaltotheefficientandeffectivedeliveryofpublicservices“

Estonia(EstonianMinistryofEconomicAffairs2014,p42)

“Wellfunctioninginformationgovernanceiscreativeinformationgovernancewhere…informationinanyform,fromanysource,sent/receivedviaanychanneliscovered.”

Administrations havetraditionally put in place strategies establishing governance and managementproceduresat the corporate level for valuable assets likehuman resources, finance, technology andintellectual property. InanInformation Society, high quality information has become one of thesevaluableassets.However,untilrecentlyfewadministrationshavetreateditassuch–particularlyatthecorporate level. Instead the focus of investment has been more on project management, systemdevelopmentandservicedelivery.Informationmanagementhasremainedapoorrelation.


10

One possible explanation for this is that informationmanagement is oftenmistakenly identifiedwithinformation technologymanagement. However, the core of informationmanagement lies not in thetechnologyassuch,butinthewayinwhichapublicadministrationperceives:• howinformationiscreatedinternally,• howitcollectsinformationfromitsexternalenvironment,• howallthisinformationisprocessed,documentedandorganizedand• how itshares, delivers and exchangesinformation internally and with citizens and other

organizations.In addition public administrations have a particular responsibility to safeguard this information, thusprotectionandpreservationaretwoaspectsthatacquirecriticalimportance.AnInformationManagementstrategyneedstomaintainadelicatebalance:itshouldremaintoacertainextenttechnology-agnosticemphasisingthebusinessrequirementsandwhilstprovidingthepotentialtoexploitnew,innovativeandcutting-edge technologicaladvances.TheCIMF isexplicitlydesigned tobeindependent of an administration’s information systems and underlying IT infrastructurewhile at thesame timeproviding a continual stimulus for their orderly evolution. Essentially theCIMF creates thecontextforcorporategovernancetodictateandoverseethisevolution.This overarching first CIMF principle has significant implications for regularly reviewing the processesthatensuretheaccuracyandintegrityofdata.Keepingdatauptodatewillalsohaveimplicationsforsystemsandresources.Where,say,dataiscapturedand/orkeyedinmanuallythecurrencyofdatacanbeproblematic.InfactwiththelikelihoodthatthevolumeofdatawillcontinuetogrowexponentiallysustainablecostmodelsforstorageandaccessmechanismswillhavetobedevelopedsothatrelevantinformationwillalwaysberetrievableObjectives

Enablers

• Createacultureofawarenessofinformationasapublicasset

• Ensurethatpublicinformationisofhighquality

• Facilitateextractionofthemaximumpublicvaluefrompublicinformation

• Ensurethatdataishighquality• Ensurecompliancewithrelevant

legislation• SupporttheDigitalSingleMarketand

eGovernmentpolicies• ImplementrelevantEuropeanCouncil

publicsectorrecommendations.

• Appropriategovernance• Awarenesscampaigns• Organisation-wideDataPolicy• Guidelinesincludingdevelopmentand

servicedeliveryguidelines• Training• Regulatorysupervision• Dataqualitystandardsandprocesses• TheEuropeanInteroperability

Framework(EIF)includingreferencearchitecturesandcommondatamodels.


11

4.2 Principle2:TheGenerationofInformationInformationshouldbegeneratedtoaidpolicyformulationandtosupportpolicyexecutionusingstandardisedformatsandexploitingbothinternalandexternalsources.This“informationgeneration”principlereferstothewayinformationiscreatedwithinanadministrationorcollected/obtained fromoutside. Ithighlights the importanceof improving the internal informationproduction, but also the need for interfaces between the organization and its externalenvironmentwhichchannelinformationanddatafromoutside.Morespecifically“create”herereferstotheinternalproductionofinformation-whyandhowanadministrationproducesinformationsatisfyinguserneeds-while“collect”referstoacquiringinformationfromtheexternalenvironment.Reviewingandstreamliningboththeseprocessesisimportantforfourreasons.Thefirstistoavoidthereinventionofexistingcontent(asthiswillleadtosavings).Thesecondistosenseandmonitorwhatishappeningintheexternalenvironment.Thethirdistoaligntheorganizationwithitsenvironmentandthe fourth is to identify and exploit thehuge amounts of available information for policy formulationandimplementation.Thisprincipledrawsonconceptsspecificallyelaboratedbyseveralcountries:Country CommentNewZealand(ICT.gov.nz2015)

“Dataandinformationsupportthepurposesforwhichtheywerecollectedand are accurate, relevant, timely, consistent and without bias in thatcontext.Wherepossiblethereisanidentifiedauthoritativesinglesource”


“Information must be accurate, valid, reliable, timely, relevant andcompletetoensurethatitmeetsthepurposesforwhichitisintended.”

Canada(GovernmentofCanada2015)

“Ensure information is complete, accurate, current, relevant, andunderstandable.Avoidcollectingduplicateinformation.”


“Information is filtered/organised/stored and preserved according to itsvalue,whileitsqualityisensured”

Informationgatheredandstoredneedstobe ‘relevant’.Determiningwhat information isrelevantandwhat isnot isnotalwayssimpleanddifferentstakeholdersare likelytohavedifferentperspectivesonrelevant.Theneedforagility impliesadoptingaforward-lookingapproachthatanticipatesasmuchaspossible futureneeds forcollecteddata.There ishoweverampleevidence thatpublicadministrationsare prone to collect data and information from citizens which is above and beyond what is strictlynecessarytodeliverpublicservicesortomakegooddecisionsoreventhantheycanmanager(Bennet2012; Latham 2016). Apart from the fact that collecting and storing unnecessary information costsmoney and undermines public trust, irrelevant information and too much information can clouddecisionmaking(O’Reilly1980;EdmundsandMorris2000;EpplerandMengis2004).Tocomplywiththisprinciple, informationanddatarequirementsneedtobereverseengineeredfrombothdecisionmakingandpolicyexecutionperspectives.Thelatter isthelesserproblem;theformerismorechallengingbecausedecisions,unlikemuchexecution,areoftenoneoffanditcanbedifficulttoknowinadvanceofagivenpolicydecisionexactlywhatinformationwillbeneeded.


12

Good decision support system design starts with the decision to be made and works back to theinformationanddatanecessarytosupportthedecisionmakers.Thiscanmeanashiftinmindsetfroma‘whatdatahavewegot” to “whatdatadoweneed” and “howcanweefficiently access/acquire thisdata”soastosatisfytheincreasingneedforon-the-flyproactivedecisionmakinginrealtime.Objectives

Enablers

• Supportevidencebaseddecisionmaking

• Supportthedeliveryofhighqualitypublicservices

• Facilitatethecreationofpublicvalue• Eliminatewastefuldataconversionand

informationinterpretationactivities• Implementagreedstandards• Exploitrelevantexternalsourcesof

information• Interoperabilitybydefault• Applytheminimalityapproach–only

datawhichisneedediscollectedandstored

• Eliminateerrorsarisingfrompoorqualitydata/information

• Eliminateerrorsfromout-of-datedata/information

• Training• Processdesign• Metadatasystems• Onceonlyprinciple• Searchengines• Federated,distributedandservice

orientedarchitectures• Setupadvancedinterfacesbetweenthe

organizationandtheexternalenvironment,capableofdealingwiththehugeamountofavailable(big)datafrommultiplesourcese.g.externalinformationsystems,socialweb,deepweb,internetofthings,sensors

• Gooddatacaptureandmaintenanceprocesses

4.3 Principle3:TheManagementofInformationInformationshouldbemanagedsoastomaximiseitsrelevancetogoodpublicadministrationandthecreationofpublicvalueapplying‘once-only’strategieswhereappropriate.Thisprinciplecoverstheinternalmanagementandprocessingofinformation.Itconcernsthecreationofdigital ecosystems to support the complex multi-dimensional collaborative decision making thatcharacterisesmodernadministrationsandthedeliveryofseamlessuser-centricdigitalpublicservices.Implementationofthisprincipleshouldpromoteaknowledge-basedcultureandcollaborativeworkingmethods across the administration. It involves the analysis, aggregation and combination of data andinformation, the de-siloisation of processes and systems and the implementation of interoperablesolutions.Severalcountrieshavesimilarconceptsandpreoccupationswhichareaddressedbythisprinciple:Country CommentAustralia(VictorianGovernment2011,p3)

“Governmentislargelyaknowledge-basedindustry.Forgovernmenttofunctioneffectively,thepublic,governmentemployeesandpartnerorganisationsmustbeabletofindtheinformationtheyneed.”


13

“Unmanagedinformationcanleadtoagenciesbreachingoftheirlegalorstatutoryobligations.”“Applyingagreedstandardstoinformationmakesiteasiertouseandinterpret.Standardshelptodeterminehowinformationwillbecollected,described,defined,storedandshared.”


“Theopportunitiesforusinginformationgreatlyincreasewhenitismadeavailableinstandardisedandlinkableformats.”

USA(ISE2004) “Facilitatestheavailabilityofinformationinaformandmannerthatfacilitatesitsuseinanalysis,investigationsandoperations.”


“Informationisseparated,gatheredtogether,systemizedandpresentedaccordingtotheneedsoftheparticularuser–anofficial/partner(citizen/entrepreneur/anotheragency).”

Implementing this principle requires putting in placemechanisms for identifying data sources, havingcatalogues,dictionariesandtaxonomiessetupaswellassophisticatedsearchcapabilities.Thisrequiresthecreationandmaintenanceofsuitablemetadatasystems(EuropeanCommission2014c)sothatpublicservantscanquicklyfindtheinformationthattheyneed.Furthermore there needs to be review processes in place which continually, or at least periodically,reviewsdataforrelevanceandcosteffectiveaccessibility.Finally to encourage reuse and facilitate ease of access a ‘once-only’ philosophy should be promotedandstrategiesadoptedwherebyeachdata item inagivensystem is storedonceonly inone location.Singleinstancestorageandcoherentdistributionmechanismseliminatethepotentialproblemsthatcanoccur when multiple copies of the same data are held in different locations and by differentorganisations.Objectives

Enablers

• Supportevidencebaseddecisionmaking

• Facilitatethecreationofpublicvalue• Promoteaknowledge-basedculture• Adoptionofcollaborativeworking

methods• Eliminatesilos• Createsynergies• Digitalbydefault• Cross-borderbydefault• Implement/evolvetointeroperable

systems• Ensurethatinformationisproperly

aggregatedandcombined• Enable/ensuredataintegrity• Coordinatedatamanagementtoavoid

• Standards• Ontologies• Masterdata,Referencedata• Guidelines• Proactivecommunicationonwho

produceswhatkindofinformation• Dataqualitystandardsandprocesses• Datastandardsi.e.formats,metadata,

semantics


14

overlaps• Arriveatagreedstandards• Re-usedonotre-invent• Reducestorageandprocessingcosts

4.4 Principle4:TheSharingofInformationInformationshouldbesharedinwaysthatmakeiteasyto(re)use,deliverandexchangeanditshouldbemadeavailablethroughmultiplechannels.This principle covers the use, exchange and sharing of information. Sharing information requirestechnical standards, semantic standards and legal structures. It also requires a willingness to share,somethingwhich is not always found in public administrations. A reluctance to sharemay arise fromseveral concerns including (but not limited to) security, privacy and commercial sensitivity. There aretwoapproachestodatasharing.Onestartsfromtheassumptionthatalldatacanbesharedexceptforspecific datasets which, for different reasons, cannot. The other is that no data is shared unless, forspecificdatasets,itispermitted.ThisCIMFprincipleisbasedonthefirstapproach,‘openbydefault’i.e.datashouldbesharedunlessthereisaspecificreasonfornotdoingso.Mostcountrieshaveconceptswhichareencompassedbythisprinciple:Country CommentNewZealand(ICT.gov.nz2015)

“Data and information held by government should be open for publicaccess unless grounds for refusal or limitations exist under the OfficialInformationActorothergovernmentpolicy.”“Useandre-useofgovernmenthelddataandinformation isexpectedtobefree.Chargingforaccessisdiscouraged.”

Canada(GovernmentofCanada2015)

“Shareandre-useinformation,respectinglegalrestrictions”


“Public information should be published, unless there are overridingreasonsnotto.”“The value of information can be multiplied by re-use, and thereforeopportunitiestore-useshouldbelookedforproactively.”

Open and linked government data policies are gaining ground all over the world (Ding Li, 2012).However,rulesaboutsharingmaybecomplicated.Licensingofdatacanbecomplicatedandtherearenumerous types of license in use ranging from Creative Common zero (CC0) which imposes norestrictionswhatsoeverondatausetoavarietyofquitelimitinglicences(KhayyatandBannister2015).Nonetheless, theprinciple is thatgovernmentdata,wherepossible, legalandsafe todoso shouldbemadeavailablefreeofrestrictions.Datashouldbeavailablethroughdifferentchannelstofacilitatetheworkofdifferentcitizengroups.


15

Objectives:

Enablers

• Makeinformationsharingthenormandopen-by-default

• Delivertouserswhattheyneed,whentheyneedit

• Fostertransparencyandcollaborationacrossthewholeorganization

• Providemulti-modalaccess(differentdevices,OSs,advancedGUIsandbrowsers)

• Fosterandenableinnovation• Fosterco-creation• Facilitatethecreationofpublicvalue• Increasetransparency• Supportopengovernment

• Dataandinformationinteroperabilityandstandards

• Informationthatispublished,searchable,findableandaccessibleacrossthewholeorganizationviabaseregistries

• Openandlinkeddataplatforms• Incentivesforinformationsharingand

reuse• Governmentcommitmenttoand

supportforopennessfollowingthePSIandopendatainitiatives

• Multimodalaccesstoinformation.

4.5 Principle5:TheProtectionofInformationInformationshouldbeprotectedasprescribedbybothEUandnationallegalcodesaswellaspublicadministrations’dataprivacyandITsecuritypolicies.Citizens and businesses must be assured that they interact with public administrations in anenvironment of trust and in full compliance with the relevant regulations, e.g. on privacy and dataprotection. Datamust only be used for the purpose for which it was collected. This means that theadministration's systemsmust guarantee theprivacyof citizensand the confidentialityof informationprovided by businesses. In addition to data confidentiality attribution, data integrity, non-repudiationanddataavailabilitymustallbeguaranteedsothattrustbetweenthecitizensandtheadministrationisensured. These needs should be implemented within the context of a common IT security and dataprivacypolicy.Itisimportanttonotethatthisprinciplemayconflictwiththeidealstatesenvisagedbyanumberoftheother CIMF principles including freedom of access and sharing.Where that happens, this protectionprinciplewilltrumpothers.Thisprincipleaddressespreoccupationsexpressedbyseveralcountries.Country CommentCanada “Support access to information, respecting privacy, policy and legal

requirements.”“Safeguardinformationagainstunlawfulaccess,lossanddamage.”

UK (The NationalArchives2015)

“Ensure citizens and businesses can access information aboutthemselves.”

USA(ISA2014) “…incorporatesprotectionsforindividuals’privacyandcivilliberties”“…incorporates strong mechanisms to enhance accountability andfacilitateoversight,includingaudits,authentication,andaccesscontrols.”


16

Objectives Enablers

• Ensurethatinformationissecure• Preventunauthorisedaccessorusage• EnsurecompliancewiththeData

ProtectionDirective• Protectcitizensandorganisationsfrom

potentialmisuseoraccidentalreleaseofinformation.

• Digitalrights• Dataprotectionlegislation

anddirectives;• Dataprotectionregulators• Informationsecuritypolicy

andimplementationplan• Dataprivacypolicyand

implementationplan• Publicawarenesscampaigns• SecurityandAvailability

4.6 Principle6:ThePreservationofInformationInformation should be preserved to ensure continued access for as long as is appropriate inaccordancewithnationaland international legal, regulatoryandarchival requirements. Informationwhichisunlikelytoserveanyfuturepublicpurposeshouldbedeleted.This principle covers the last phases of the Information lifecycle and should ensure that anadministrationhas policies andservices in place to preserve information for the long-term. Processesandprocedurestoguarantee its integrityandauthenticityovertime,tomake itavailabletothepublicafteracertaintimeandtocooperatewiththedigitalarchivesoftheState'sNationalArchivesneedtobeinplace.Severalcountrieshaveissueswhichthisprincipleaddresses:Country CommentNewZealand(ICT.gov.nz2015)

“Agencies are stewards of government-held data and information andmust provide and require good practices which manage the data andinformation over their life-cycle, including catering for technologicalobsolescenceandlongtermpreservationandaccess.”

Canada(Government ofCanada2015)

“Preserve information inaccordancewith itsoperational, legal, financialandhistoricalvalue.”

An important, but oftenoverlooked, consequenceof this principle is thatmaintenanceof datawhichneeds to be stored over long periods (say a decade ormore)must be stored inmediawhichwill bepermanent and readable in the future. This means confronting the problem of what Vince Cerf hascharacterisedas“bitrot”,i.e.theinabilitytoaccessdatabecausethemediumonwhichitisstoredisnolongeraccessible(Sample2015).BronzeAgeclaytabletsarestillperfectlyreadabletoday.Evenwhenallfileswereonpaperthiswas,atworst,a longtermproblemasgoodqualitypaperhasa lifeofseveralhundredyears.Current formsofmagneticmediamayhavea lifeof lessthantenyears. Implementingthisprinciplewillrequiredevelopmentoflongtermstoragestrategies.


17

When data is no longer serving any useful purpose and is not going to do so at some future time itshouldbepermanentlydeleted.This isnotjusttoensurecompliancewithdataprotectionandprivacylegislation,buton thegroundofefficiency. Implementing thisprinciplemeans thatgoodpractices forimmediatedeletionneedtobeinplaceasdoperiodicreviewprocesses.Objectives Enablers

• Ensurethatinformationispreserved

accordingtoitshistoricalvalue• Ensuretheauthenticityandintegrityof

preservedinformation• Avoidpotentiallossofdatadueto

fragilityofthemediumonwhichdatais(initially)stored

• Ensurethattechnologicalobsolescencedoesnotimpactaccessibility

• Ensurethatinformationisdeletedwhennolongerneededorofvalue

• Disposeofinformationthatisnotofhistoricalvalue

• Reduceunnecessarystorage• Improvesearchandaccessbyreducing

clutter

• Informationpreservationpolicyandimplementationplan

• Standards-basedlongtermdigitalpreservationsolutions

• Organisationalentitiesinchargeofinformationpreservationpolicyandimplementationplan

• • Organisationalentitiesin

chargeofpreservationandarchiving

• Preservationandarchiving• Timestamping• Training• RegularReviewsofdata

relevance

5. ImplementationIssuesIt serves no purpose for a large and complex public administration to address the issues discussedindependently for each principle. To achieve the potential benefits accruing from better informationmanagement, a holistic information management framework is proposed which fosters mutualunderstanding by all stakeholders of the challenge, creates a common space for discussion andfacilitatesthemonitoringandfollow-upofagreedactions.ThisisthepurposeoftheproposedCIMF.TheCIMFneedstobetailoredtothespecificneedsandmaturityofeachadministration.Itisimportantthat the resultingvariantof theCIMF remainsatahigh levelandat the same timeprovidespracticaldirection and advice. To this end, both the objectives and more importantly the enablers for eachprinciple should be elaborated and detailed taking into account the specific circumstances of eachadministration.Applying this framework would inevitably introduce significant cultural changes throughout anadministration.Thehorizontal/corporateversusvertical/departmentviewandthefocusonlocalversusglobaloptimummayrequirefundamentalculturalre-orientationonhowlocalmanagersreporttoandcoordinate with the corporate level. This could in turn create a need for new job profiles andcoordinationroles, introducenewhorizontalandsilo-breakingprocessesandrequirecoordinatedlocal


18

and corporate actions and project management. Resistance to change could be a reaction if suchchangesresultinaredistributionofpowerwithintheorganisation.For these reasons it is considered critical that the framework be approved and supported by topmanagement at corporate level and that it continue to enjoy their support, ownership and politicalsponsorshipunderpinnedbypermanentseniormanagementcommitmentandoversight.Corporate approval for this shift in emphasis from technology to information and from local tocorporate would require a comprehensive cost-benefit analysis, a risk assessment, a road map, acommunicationstrategyandinclusivegovernancestructures.CIOs(whohaveexistedinanumberofEUcountriesforsometimeandhaverecentlybeenappointedinseveralothers)shouldberesponsiblepolitically fortheCIMF.Theoperational implementationmaybedelegatedtoaChiefDataOfficer.Theframework,oncetailoredtoanadministration'sspecificneeds,shouldbeinternallycommunicatedina language that iseasy tounderstand forall stakeholders. It should remainstableover timewithachangemanagementmechanismwell-describedandestablished.Once adopted an essential element of the CIMF implementation would be the definition of anorganisation-wideDataPolicyspecifyingelementssuchasclassification,metadata, licensing,qualityaswellasmoresocialaspectsofdatagovernanceincludingpublicengagement,rolesandresponsibilities.Developmentandservicedeliveryguidelinesneedtobeupdatedandadaptedsoas toemphasise theCIMFandtoensurethatitsprinciplesunderpinall ITactivities.Existingandnewsystems,aswellasallinternal and external information flows should be positioned and analysed vis-à-vis the CIMF. Newcorporatesoftwaresystemsmayneedtocoverthegapsbetweenthesilos.Ahallmarkofmodernpublicadministrationsisthequalityoftheirdigitalpublicservicesandassociatedinformationsystems.EmbeddingtheCIMFprinciplesinanadministration'sITdesign,developmentanddelivery processes should contribute to the evolution of the portfolio of mission-critical systemsresulting in better quality and more innovative, user centric, reliable and permanent eGovernmentservicesbasedoncommon interoperableandreusablecomponents (Coyleetal2010;DeasyandNoel2010).Inthiscontextadoptingan‘Interoperability-by-design/digitalbydefault/cross-borderbydefault/openbydefault’paradigmbasedontheCIMFprincipleswouldcreateaculturewherethe‘InformationLayer’andInformationInteroperabilitytakecentrestage:"TheInformationLayer...thestuffofinformation...weshouldthinkimaginativelyaboutwhatitcouldbelikeforcomputersystemsnotonlytomakesuchstuffavailabletousers,buttoexploititforthemselves"(SpärckJones2007).Theseorganizationalandtechnologicalchangesmayrequiresubstantialdedicatedhumanandfinancialresources.It is reemphasisedthat theCIMFmustbeestablishedmanagedand implementedat thecorporate (orenterprise)level,justifyingthe“C”initstitle.Onceadopted,theCIMFhasthepotentialtobecomethecornerstone for a broader corporate information management strategy for the administration whichshouldbeputinplaceatthehighestpossibleleveltoavoidfragmentationandduplication.


19

6. ConclusionIn this paper, we have outlined some of the challenges modern public administrations face whenmanaginginformation.Tomeetthesechallengesandaccommodateever-increasinginformationneeds,the adoption and promulgation of a Corporate Information Management Framework (CIMF) isproposed.Thisproposalisbasedonexperiencesandbestpracticesidentifiedinseveralcountriesandinanumberofacademicsources.The fact that the CIMF is at the global, corporate level, articulating a holistic set of informationmanagement principles to be applied across the administration, represents a paradigm shift andintroduces,weargue,arevolutioninhowpublicadministrationsmanageinformation.Withthegrowingdemandfordigitalpublicservices,theadventofbigdata,theimminentarrivaloftheInternet of Things and escalating cyberattacks, informationmanagementwill becomemore politicallyimportant. Widespread endorsement of this framework would send a timely message that the EUInstitutionsandpublicadministrationsacrossEuropearelayingthefoundationsforinformationpoliciesfitforpurposeforthepublicsectorinthe21stcentury(IrishTimes2000).Whiledesignedwiththepublicsectorinmind,thereisnoreasonwhytheCIMFproposedinthispapercouldnotbeconsideredanexampleofbestpracticeapplicable to theprivatesector. Itcouldalsobethebasis foraglobal informationmanagement frameworktoaddress the information issues linkedtoclimatechange,trade,terrorismandcivilrights.

AcknowledgementsTheauthorsofthispaperacknowledgethemanystimulatingdiscussionsandcontributionsofEuropeanCommission staff in the Informatics Directorate General and the Secretariat General. However theopinions expressed in this paper are solely those of the authors and are not official policy of theCommission.

ReferencesAckoff,R.L.(1989)Fromdatatowisdom,Journalofappliedsystemsanalysis,16(1),3-9.Barocas, S., andH.Nissenbaum (2014)Bigdata's end runaroundanonymityand consent (pp. 44-75),CambridgeUniversityPress,NY.Bennett,D.(2012)TheU.S.GovernmentHasCollectedMoreDataThanItCouldEverPossiblyRead,TheWire,May10th2012.Availableat:http://www.thewire.com/technology/2012/05/us-government-has-collected-more-data-it-could-ever-possibly-read/52179/


20

Bovalis, K., Peristeras, V. Abecasis, M. Abril-Jimenez, R.-M. Alvarez Rodriguez, M. Gattegno, C.Karalopoulos, A. Sagias,, I. Szekacs and S. Wigard (2014) Promoting Interoperability in Europe's E-Government,Computer,47(10),pp.25-33.Availableat:http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?tp=&arnumber=6926660&isnumber=6926651,Brague, C. and R. Champlin (2014) Enterprise Information Management with SAP (2nd Edition), SAPPress.Brynjolfsson,E.,1994.Informationassets,technologyandorganization.ManagementScience,40(12),pp.1645-1662Coyle, L., L. M. Hinchey, B. Nuseibeh, J. L. Fiadeiro (2010) Introduction: Evolving Critical Systems,Computer,43(5),pp.28-33.Deasy,D.andF.Noel(2010)CriticalSystemsEnablingEuropeanIntegration,Computer,43(5),p32.DingLi,PeristerasV.,HausenblasM.,(2012),LinkedOpenGovernmentData(Editorial), IEEEIntelligentSystems,27(3):11-15.Edmunds, A. andMorris, A. (2000) The problem of information overload in business organisations: areviewoftheliterature.Internationaljournalofinformationmanagement,20(1),pp.17-28.EIU(TheEconomistIntelligenceUnit)(2008)Thefutureofenterpriseinformationgovernance,EIU.Eppler,M.J.andMengis,J.(2004).Theconceptofinformationoverload:Areviewofliteraturefromorganizationscience,accounting,marketing,MIS,andrelateddisciplines.Theinformationsociety,20(5),pp.325-344.EstonianMinistry for Economic Affairs (2014) InformationGovernance: Current situation analysis andimplementationstrategy.Availableat:www.mkm.ee/sites/default/files/information_governance_analys_strategy_oige.pdfEuropeanCommission(2010a)EuropeanInteroperabilityFramework(EIF)forEuropeanpublicservices.Annex2to“TowardsinteroperabilityforEuropeanpublicservices”.Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/isa/documents/isa_annex_ii_eif_en.pdf.European Commission (2010b) The European eGovernment Action Plan 2011-2015;Harnessing ICT topromotesmart,sustainable&innovativeGovernment,COM(2010)743Final.Availableat:http://www.umic.pt/images/stories/publicacoes5/action_plan_en_act_part1_v2.pdf.European Commission (2011) European Interoperability Architecture (EIA) Phase 2 – Final Report :CommonVisionforanEIA,Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/isa/documents/isa_2.1_eia-finalreport-commonvisionforaneia.pdf.European Commission (2012) Communication from VP Šefčovič to the Commission: Delivering user-centricdigitalservices,SEC(2012)492Final.Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/informatics/ecomm/doc/communication_sefcovic_tothecom.pdf.


21

European Commission (2013) DIRECTIVE 2003/98/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THECOUNCIL of 17 November 2003 on the re-use of public sector information. Amended by: Directive2013/37/EUoftheEuropeanParliamentandoftheCouncilof26June2013.Availableat:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02003L0098-20130717&from=ENEuropeanCommission(2014)AnnualGrowthSurvey2015,COM(2014)902final.Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/europe2020/pdf/2015/ags2015_en.pdf.EuropeanCommission (2014b)Proposal foraDECISIONOFTHEEUROPEANPARLIAMENTANDOFTHECOUNCIL establishing a programme on interoperability solutions for European public administrations,businessesandcitizens(ISA2),Brussels,26.6.14COM(2014)367Final,Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/isa/documents/isa_2_proposal_en.pdfEuropeanCommission(2014c)MethodologyandtoolsforMetadataGovernanceandManagementforEUInstitutionsandMemberStates.Availableat:http://joinup.ec.europa.eu/site/core_vocabularies/governance_and_management_of_structural_metadata/Methodology-and-tools-for-Structural-Metadata-Management-and-Governance-for-EU-Institutions-and-Member-States_v1.00.pdfEuropean Commission (2015a) Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations: Our ISASolutionsforyou.Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/isa/ready-to-use-solutions/index_en.htm.European Commission (2015b) Interoperability Solutions for European Public Administrations: ISA2.Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/isa/isa2/index_en.htm.EuropeanCommission(2015c)DCATapplicationprofilefordataportalsinEurope.Availableat:https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/asset/dcat_application_profile/description.European Commission (2015d) A Digital Single Market Strategy for Europe. SWD(2015) 100 Final,Availableat:http://ec.europa.eu/priorities/digital-single-market/docs/dsm-communication_en.pdf.European Commission (2013) Interoperability Maturity Model, Joinup e-Library April 23rd 2013.Availableat:https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/elibrary/document/interoperability-maturity-model.EuropeanUnion(2009)MinisterialDeclarationoneGovernment,se2009eu.Availableat:https://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/sites/digital-agenda/files/ministerial-declaration-on-egovernment-malmo.pdf.Geragas, D. (2015) Value and Implications of Master Data Management (MDM) and MetadataManagement,SEMIC2015,5thMay2015Riga–Latvia.Glazer,R.,1993.Measuringthevalueofinformation:Theinformation-intensiveorganization.IBMSystemsJournal,32(1),pp.99-110.


22

Government of Canada (2015) Public Works and Government Services Canada: InformationManagement–KnowledgeArea.Availableat:http://www.tpsgc-pwgsc.gc.ca/biens-property/sngp-npms/ti-it/conn-know/gi-im-eng.html#wb-tphpHausmann, V., S. Williams, C. Hard and P. Schubert (2014) Enterprise Information ManagementReadiness:Asurveyofcurrentissues,challengesandstrategy,ProcediaTechnology,16,pp.42-51.IDBAC (2010) CAMSS: Common Assessment Method for Standards and Specifications. Available at:http://ec.europa.eu/idabc/en/document/7407.html.ICT.gov.nz(2015)GuidanceandResources,Availableat:https://www.ict.govt.nz/guidance-and-resources/open-government/new-zealand-data-and-information-management-principles/IrishTimes(2000)“LetUsStepWithHopeIntoOurNewCentury",Editorial,1January2000.ISE(InformationSharingEnvironment)(2004)IntelligenceReformandTerrorismPreventionActof2004,Sec1016,InformationSharing.Availableat:http://ise.gov/intelligence-reform-and-terrorism-prevention-act-2004-sec-1016-information-sharingISE(InformationSharingEnvironment)(2014)DataAggregationReferenceArchitecture(DARA)Version1.0,December2014,Availableat:https://www.ise.gov/resources/document-library/data-aggregation-reference-architecture-dara-v10ISE (Information Sharing Environment) (2015a) Geospatial Interoperability Reference Architecture,(GIRA)Version1.0,April2015,V1.0,Availableat:https://www.ise.gov/resources/document-library/geospatial-interoperability-reference-architecture-giraISE(InformationSharingEnvironment)(2015b)ProjectInteroperabilityStartupGuide,April2015,V1.0,Availableat:http://project-interoperability.github.io/Jackson,I.F.(1986).CorporateInformationManagement.NewJersey,Prentice-Hall,Inc.Jenkins,T.(2012)BehindtheFirewall.BigDataandtheHiddenWeb:ThePathtoEnterpriseInformationManagement,OpenTextCorporation.Khatri,V.andBrown,C.V.,2010.Designingdatagovernance.CommunicationsoftheACM,53(1),pp.148-152.Khayyat, M., & Bannister, F. (2015). Open data licensing: More than meets the eye.InformationPolity,20(4),231-252.Kooper,M.N.,Maes,R.andLindgreen,E.R.,2011.Onthegovernanceofinformation:Introducinganewconceptofgovernancetosupportthemanagementofinformation.InternationalJournalofInformationManagement,31(3),pp.195-200.


23

Moody,D.L.andWalsh,P.,1999,June.MeasuringtheValueOfInformation-AnAssetValuationApproach.InECIS(pp.496-512).Latham,E.(2016)IstheGovernmentHoardingTooMuchData?,GovernmentTechnology,February9th2016.Availableat:http://www.govtech.com/opinion/Is-the-Government-Hoarding-Too-Much-Data.htmlOfficial Journal (2008) Consolidated versions of the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on theFunctioningoftheEuropeanUnion,51,9thMay2008.Availableat:http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:TOC.Official Journal of the European Parliament (2000) The EU Charter on Fundamental Rights, 2000/c364/01.Availableat:http://www.europarl.europa.eu/charter/pdf/text_en.pdfO'Reilly,C.A.,1980.Individualsandinformationoverloadinorganizations:ismorenecessarilybetter?.Academyofmanagementjournal,23(4),pp.684-696.Sample, I. (2015)Googlebosswarnsof 'forgottencentury'withemailandphotosat risk,Manchester,TheGuardian,13thFebruary2015.Availableat:http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/feb/13/google-boss-warns-forgotten-century-email-photos-vint-cerfSemanticCommunity(2015)CoreVocabularies.Availableat:http://semanticommunity.info/Be_Informed_for_SEMIC.EU/Core_Vocabularies.Spärck Jones K. (2007) Natural Language and the Information Layer, in 2007 Athena Lecturer Award,SIGIR '07 Proceedings of the 30th annual international ACM SIGIR conference on Research anddevelopmentininformationretrieval,pp3-6.TheNationalArchives(2015)InformationPrinciples.Availableat:http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/information-management/manage-information/planning/information-principles/Van de Lans, A. and P. van Til (2013) Enterprise Information Management (EIM), in Baan, P. (Ed).EnterpriseInformationManagement:WhenInformationBecomesInspiration,NewYork,Springer.VictorianGovernment(Australia)(2011)InformationManagementPrinciples,Availableat:http://www.enterprisesolutions.vic.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/IM-GUIDE-00-Information-Management-Principles-2.0.pdfPeristerasV.(2013)SemanticStandards:PreventingWasteintheInformationIndustry, IEEEIntelligentSystems,28(4)pp.72-75,July-Aug.Sarsfield,S.,2009.Thedatagovernanceimperative.ITGovernancePublishingVomBrocke,J.andA.Simons(2014)EnterpriseContentManagementinInformationSystemsResearch:Foundations,MethodsandCases(ProgressinIS),Berlin,Springer.


24

Documents

A Corporate Information Management Framework for the … · 2017-10-03 · Academic CIMF V1.4 23rd June 2016 1 A Corporate Information Management Framework for the European Public