Information Governance - Monash Universitydsslab.infotech.monash.edu.au/downloads/practitioner...Information Technology Decision Support Systems Laboratory Contents 1. Overview 1 2

Information Technology Decision Support Systems Laboratory

- [Revised Version] –

Practice guide

Information Governance

What is it?

How to implement it?

Information Technology

Decision Support Systems Laboratory

Practice Guide

Information Governance: What is it? How to implement it?

Published by: Decision Support Systems Laboratory Monash University PO Box 197 Caulfield East, Victoria 3145 Australia.

Telephone Fax

03-9903 1950 03-9903 2005

IDD 61-3-9903 1950 IDD 61-3-9903 2005

http://dsslab.infotech.monash.edu.au/index.php/informationgovernance

Copyright © 2014 Monash University.

All rights reserved.

No part of this practice guide can be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or

transmitted in any form or means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or

otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher. This technical report

may be cited in academic works without permission of the publisher.



Contents

1. Overview ............................................................................................................................................... 1

2. What is information governance? ........................................................................................................ 4

3. How to implement information governance? ...................................................................................... 7

Establishment of the general IG framework ............................................................................................. 9

Plan ......................................................................................................................................................... 12

Deploy ..................................................................................................................................................... 14

Evaluate................................................................................................................................................... 15

4. How to implement IG in different scenarios? ..................................................................................... 16

5. Summary ............................................................................................................................................. 19

Template □A : Value statement for the information governance framework .......................................... 21

Template □B : Assessment of the current situation of the organization under the taxonomy angle ...... 25

Template □C : Example of alignment of information to a particular business objective .......................... 26

Template □D : Approaches that can be used to measure attitudes towards the implementation........... 27


1


Information Governance: What is it? How to implement it?

1. Overview

Organizations have long realised that

information plays an important role to

produce economic benefits. But organizations

often struggle with the way to shape their

information environment to achieve

economic gain, especially when it comes to

allocate roles and responsibilities over

information and make the most out of the

technological aids available. There are

numerous examples that show companies

losing large amounts of money due to many

different information-related issues such as:

operational errors resulting from poor data

quality, decisions based on inaccurate

information, misuse of confidential data, etc.

Information is a valuable asset, but its

intangible nature makes it hard to shape it in

a more or less defined framework of use

across the entire organization. Also, the

interests of use of information vary across the

different units of the organization, which adds

to that difficulty of regulation. The problem

increases when considering the needs of

different organizations. In fact, many

organizations simply struggle with collecting

data, others have the data but do not know

how to effectively structure or integrate it,

others constantly battle with its quality and

how to make sense of it, and others try to use

information to trigger strategic changes for

competitive advantage. Many organizations

face all those problems at once.

Information management vs. information

governance

The position taken in this research is that the

problem should be tackled from an

information governance perspective and not

from an information management perspective

only. Governance has a permanent presence

in the organization, establishing a stable

framework of ‘who’ should be making

decisions around information to influence

desirable behaviour of employees around

organizational objectives. Management is the

immediate execution of the guidelines

established by the governance framework.

Filling in the gap

Up to now, academic literature has mainly

provided guidance on governance of

information technology (IT), stressing the

‘technology’ part and not much the

‘information’ part. Vendor and consultant

literature have been progressively introducing

the concept of ‘data governance’, however

this concept again mainly revolves around

technical issues and in general it lacks

empirical validity to provide credibility in

academic and practitioner circles. In

consequence when organizations are faced

with the problem of implementing an

information governance framework, they

have no reliable guidance on how to do it

effectively.

In order to fill that gap, this document

presents the current result of academic

research that investigates the meaning of the

concept information governance and the way

to implement it effectively in the organization.

The research conducted has not only included

an exhaustive revision of academic literature

on related topics such as corporate

governance, IT governance, and

organizational design. It has also covered

practitioner, consultant, and vendor


2


literature1, and most importantly it has

sourced its fundamental building blocks from

insights provided in individual interviews and

a focus group by an elite sample of top

senior business and IT executives from large

companies in different industry sectors such

as telecommunications, financial services,

retail , mining, technology, and heav y

manufacturing, by senior executives of

consulting companies, and by information

systems academics. The main characteristics

of the method of implementation presented

in this document were extracted directly

from the information collected. The most

relevant characteristics are summarised

below:

Table 1: Some characteristics of an information governance framework

Information governance should be tailored to the needs of each organization.

Information is a concept that is understood differently by each organization.

Information governance should account for four aspects: socio-political aspects, economic aspects, technological aspects, and organizational contingencies

The core of the implementation is defined by the way an organization is capable of aligning those four aspects to the way the organization understands information.

Implementation should be flexible to account for the complex environment of organizations

Implementation should be approached as a long-lasting commitment in the organization, rather than a one-time project.

Implementation should consider the establishment of a flexible organization-wide level and a specific level of implementation defined by the needs of the organization.

What’s the benefit of implementing information governance?

Doesn’t this mean introducing more complexity into the organization?

Organisations that have endured the pain of

financial loss due to a messy information

environment clearly understand the need of

organizing governance around information,

and evidently those who have not considered

it yet are probably in risk or missing a better

way of doing things.

Many organizations are weary of

implementing programmes that sound very

big and unattainable. However there is a

crucial aspect that organizations should be

able to understand. Dealing with information is

a complex problem, because of the very

intangible nature of information.

Additionally, organizations live and develop in

complex and competitive environments. In

consequence, organizations should be able to

respond to that complexity not by simplifying

their own structures, but by increasing its own

complexity to the level of the environment,

what is known as ‘requisite complexity’.

1 Some of the sources revised are SAS, Gartner, IBM, DGI, and Mike 2.0


3


Understanding the complexity of the

environment is achieved by having permanent

dynamic cycles of implementation of

information governance operating at a

specific level, able to respond to needs of

particular business units and able to use

information to adapt and innovate. These

particular cycles should be guided by general

objectives set in an information governance

framework at an organization-wide level,

flexible enough to allow business units make

their own decisions about information.

In consequence, an information governance

implementation that explicitly describes

allocation of decision rights, considering

contingencies, economic and technological

aspects will help organizations take full

advantage of its information environment in

order to support strategic decisions, regular

operations, or the implementation of specific

projects, and in order to level the organization

to the complexity of the environment.

What’s in this guide?

This guide is divided into three parts:

The first part presents the conceptualisation of information governance by explaining a way to approach information and a way to understand how to govern it.

The second part presents a method to implement information governance, describing each stage of the process, starting with the establishment of an organizational-wide information governance framework to then proceed with the specific cycles of implementation.

The third part of the guide contains templates and examples of specific activities that are mentioned in the method of implementation in order to provide ideas to practitioners on how to execute the process. The templates are by no means a strict recipe to follow. They should be used as reference only, organizations are encouraged to adapt them or create new ones in order to accommodate to their particular circumstances.

Definition

Implementation

Examples


4


2. What is information governance?

The term “information governance” or “data

governance” has become a buzz word in

white papers, consultant literature and

practitioner magazines. However, an

exhaustive common definition resulting from

academic empirical research has never been

attempted, until now.

What to govern?

The first thing to clarify is: what’s exactly the

‘thing’ to be governed? In other words,

what’s ‘information’? People have different

ideas of what the concept means, and

consequently organizations may consider the

concept of information differently, and even

the same organization may use different

definitions in different situations. This

research has found that one way an

organization can define the boundaries of the

information to govern is by using a

combination of three angles to view

information: a taxonomy-based angle, a

format-based angle, and a content-based

angle.

○1 Taxonomy-based angle: This angle offers

four views to understand information2:

Token view: Under this view data and information are the same. Data is considered ‘tokens’ that can be manipulated by processes. Bits of data have no particular relation among themselves, data can act as input or output of a process, and it does not include human interpretation. An example of this could be the individual values that are stored in tables in a data base that can be taken and processed.

Syntax view: Under this view tokens are seen as having relationships among themselves and that relationship can be measured. This type of information is objective and still independent from the observer. It does not consider human

interpretation or meaning. For example, this is the type of information that is observed when identifying and measuring attribute relationships across different databases.

Representation view: This view incorporates human interpretation; it considers information as a model of something to someone. Meaning emerges from a sign that stands for an object to an individual, assuming an objective reality. For example, this is the view that is used when an analyst examines financial transaction records of purchases and interprets that the latest marketing campaign is being successful.

Adaptation view: This view considers that information is created when a system perceives a “difference” in its environment. That difference alters the system. Reality is subjective because the interpretation of what a “difference” is depends on the system. The “system” can be a single individual or the organization as a whole. For example if a company perceives that sales are declining, and that declining makes a difference to the firm, then there is information. If the company does not perceive the declining of sales or the perception makes no difference to the company, then there’s no information.

○2 Format based angle: Additionally, the

organization may find useful to classify

information into structured information (the

one formatted inside data bases) and

unstructured information (the one found

under undefined formats in documents,

invoices, emails, informal communication

channels, etc.).

○3 Content based angle: Also, the

organization may find useful to classify its

information into relevant business subjects

or core business concepts (e.g. information

about the customer, about products, about

lines of business, etc.)

2 McKinney, E., & Yoos, C. (2010). Information about information: A taxonomy of views. MIS Quarterly, 34(2), 329-344


5


Taxonomy angle

Format

angle Content

angle

The organization may decide to integrate the

three perspectives according to its own needs

to define information in order to establish the

information governance framework. For

example, the organization may decide to

govern mainly information that is structured

(format angle), for the token and

representational views (taxonomy angle), for

information about the customer, products,

suppliers, etc. (content angle).

Aspects of Governance

After understanding what is being governed,

it is time to define the aspects of governance

that have to be considered to build an

information governance framework. These

aspects are described below.

Aspects of governance to be considered

Socio political

aspects of IG

These aspects represent how the organization allocates decision rights to

encourage desirable behaviour in the use of information, by making use of

formal structures, acknowledging informal structures, and using mechanisms

like policies, rules, procedures, and committees to enforce the objectives of a

governance framework.

Business strategy

aspects of IG

These aspects refer to the way an organization plans to achieve economic gain

out of the information views, for example by aligning business objectives or its

strategy with the use of information.

Technological

aspects of IG

It represents the way the organization makes use of technology to benefit

from all views of information. These aspects refer to IT infrastructure, IT

architecture, applications, master data, metadata, access, security, storage,

etc.

Contingencies

They are the particular characteristics of an organization that influence how

socio-political, economic, and technical aspects of the information happen in

each organization. They may include internal contingencies (e.g. corporate

culture, political relationships, employee skill level, etc.) or external

contingencies (e.g. industry sector, regulators, competitors, etc.)

Figure 1: Defining organizational information


6


Putting it all together

When combining the perspective on

information an organization has together with

the aspects of governance, it is possible to

define information governance.

In fact, what defines information governance is

the way an organization describes its

information and aligns it to the aspects of

governance.

Figure 2 presents a model that captures the

main elements of the definition of information

governance. Notice that information takes a

central place as the core element of the

governance framework. The aspects of

governance moderate and influence each other.

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ectsTe

chn

olo

gica

l as

pec

ts

Contingencies

Business strategy aspects

INFORMATIONTaxonom

y

Angle

Content Angle

Format Angle

Figure 2: The concept of information governance

Information governance refers to the

arrangement of the organization’s socio-

political aspects, business strategy aspects,

technological aspects, and contingencies in

order to obtain economic benefit from its

information.


7


3. How to implement information governance?

The implementation of information

governance has two main levels: a general

organization-wide level where the overall IG

framework for the organization is established,

and a particular level where specific

implementations are developed in a

continuous fashion (Figure 3). The nature of

the specific implementations is decided

according to the needs of each organization

(e.g. by business unit, by business objective,

by project, etc.).

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Figure 3: Method to implement information governance

Organization wide level: Settling the

foundations

The general IG framework settles the

overarching guidelines that will serve as a

reference for particular implementations. It

represents a rather stable environment that

intends to anchor the values of the

implementation into the core of the

organization. The idea is to establish

objectives and goals around information, but

leave specific decisions on how to achieve

those objectives to the groups in the

organization that will carry out particular

implementations.

During the establishment of the IG

framework, the organization is called to

identify, among others, the following aspects:

sponsors of the implementation, objectives of

the IG programme, motivations that drive the

implementation, boundaries that will define

the scope of the implementation, the way the

framework will support the business strategy,

the way technology will support the

implementation, the way information can be


8


assigned economic value, external and

internal contingencies to consider, general

rules and policies, the nature of the particular

implementations that will be developed, etc.

Specific implementations: Launching

particular implementations

While the IG framework is seen as a more

stable environment, a specific

implementation is regarded as a dynamic on-

going cycle that is capable of responding to

particular environmental contingencies and

still able to comply with the main objectives

established in the general IG framework.

There are three main activities that are

constantly being performed during a specific

implementation cycle: plan, deploy, and

evaluate. The main objective of each cycle is

to achieve alignment between information

and the business strategy aspects, socio-

political aspects, technological aspects, and

contingencies.

The implementation of information

governance may consist of more than one

cycle (Figure 4). For example, an organization

may decide to run one cycle of

implementation per business unit. Another

organization may decide to run cycles for

particular business objectives. All cycles may

have different particular objectives, however

they must follow as reference the objectives

set in the general IG framework. Also, after

each cycle reaches its evaluation phase and

comes back to review its plan, it is necessary

to communicate any feedback to the general

IG framework in order to contribute to its

improvement. The following sections present

in detail the activities for the implementation

of information governance.

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Evaluate

Plan

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies

INFORMATION

Deploy

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

Evaluate

Plan

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies

INFORMATION

Deploy

Evaluate

Deploy

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan

INFORMATION

INFORMATION

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle



Figure 4: Context of the implementation of information governance


9


Establishment of the general IG framework

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

EvaluateTaxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

Taxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

The establishment and communication of the

general IG framework at an organization-wide

level is the first stage to start the

implementation. This phase represents the

explicit recognition of the need to formalise

existing tacit practices and to incorporate new

ones. It is fundamental to understand that

this general framework represents a

reference guide for the organization, flexible

enough to allow each particular

implementation to decide on how to achieve

the general objectives. There are two steps in

the establishment of the framework: an

initiation and a diagnose step.

Initiation

This first step represents the kick-off of the

implementation which should be sponsored

by a senior management group, with

representation from different areas of the

business. This group can become the

organization’s “information council” to

foresee and referee information disputes in

the future.

The group should approve a value statement

which as a minimum it should contain:

Objectives of the implementation.

Definition of the core business strategy

that should be supported. See Template

□A section 2 for possible alternatives to

consider.

Definition of what is considered to be the

information that should be governed in

terms of its format, content, and

taxonomy. For example, an organization

may define as ‘governable’, information

that is mainly structured (format) and

refers to customer, product, sales,

deliveries, and suppliers (content), with a

strong emphasis on the representation or

interpretation (taxonomy) of the data (see

Template □A section 4 for details).

Identify the value of information and

prioritise (see Template □A section 5 for

techniques).

Estimated economic benefit drawn from

the implementation

Definition of the nature of the particular

cycles of implementation that will be

deployed and the prioritisation of the

cycles. The “nature” of the iteration refer

to the criterion that defines an iteration.

For example, iterations can be done by

business units, or by general business

objectives, by projects, etc. Once the

criterion is clear, it is necessary to prioritise

the order of the iterations. Two techniques

that can be considered to define the order

are the prioritization quadrant analysis,

and the prioritization matrix. These two


10


techniques are presented in Template □A

section 8.

Definition of a regulatory framework

around information that will apply at an

organization-wide level. It is important to

consider that the framework has to be

adequate for the purpose that it is

required without restricting important

aspects of the operation of the business

such as creativity or innovation that spring

from the use of information. Regulations

also need to be flexible enough to

accommodate for exceptions that are

required to help support business

operations.

Definition of the macro boundaries of the

implementation to understand the scope

where the framework applies (e.g. only

local business units, all international

business units, local units and key business

partners, etc.). See Template □A section 6

for details.

An initial implementation team can also be

established by the council at this point in

order to help put together the value

statement, generate diagnoses, and help

execute the implementation onto the next

phases.

Diagnose

It is fundamental to analyse and understand

the factors that drive the implementation.

Reconsider the effort of going ahead with the

implementation if the triggers found respond

purely to compliance with external or internal

regulators or the objective is purely to

underpin political struggles within the

organization. The drivers of the

implementation should respond to a genuine

motivation to obtain economic gain, to

achieve a common vision of information, or to

send a positive signal to the market.

Additionally, the organization should

understand how information is currently

being used under the four aspects of

information governance (economic value,

socio-political aspects, technological aspects,

and contingencies). A way to assess this is by

asking questions similar to the ones presented

in Template □B . Questions in that template

organize information according to the

taxonomy angle, classifying information into

the token, syntax, representation, and

adaptation views. Some questions can be

chosen to be discussed with users in order to

understand the current information

environment of the organization.

Finally it is important to identify current IG

practices that may be happening implicitly in

the organization, in order to enforce them or

replace them for better practices.

Table 2 summarises the activities of the

establishment of the information governance

framework.


11


Table 2: Establishment of the general IG framework

Definition Activities Examples of possible actions to take or instruments to be used

People involved Deliverables

The initiation phase corresponds to the establishment of the IG foundations

Init

iati

on

Initial sponsorship: Definition of initial sponsors of the program, ideally they should be senior executives.

Meetings to delineate the first steps in the project.

Kick-off meeting to communicate to the rest of the company the intentions of the programme.

Value statement template

Senior management team.

The initial implementation team, preferably from different areas in the organization

Value statement document

Diagnose document containing the assessment in the four areas and recommendations for the following phase.

Value statement: Establish a value statement to specify the broad objectives expected, the definition of organizational information, the value and prioritisation of information, the estimated economic benefit drawn from the implementation, the definition of the nature of the iterations, the definition of a general framework of policies and rules, and the definition of the macro boundaries of the implementation.

Staffing: Definition of the senior management team or “information council” and establishment of the initial team that will be involved in the implementation. Definition of primary roles in the teams.

Dia

gno

se

Drivers of implementation: Clearly identify and state the triggers that drive the implementation

Questionnaire similar to the one presented in Template

□B , answered by information

users in individual and collective settings (workshops)

Stakeholder analysis

Instrument (e.g. flowchart) to determine information lifecycle considering line of business, products, customers, etc.

Collect manuals, reports, documents, data models, etc.

List and describe the main systems that support business operation and decision making.

List and describe the problems related to information reported by users.

Determine data architecture and infrastructure of the company.

Create a map or diagram that depicts all systems, inputs, and outputs per business unit, and of the whole organization.

List and define the environmental characteristics of the organization for example in regards to corporate culture, organizational structure, embracement of change, individual skills, etc.

Employee and team attitude assessment

Skill inventory analysis

The implementation team

Users that will provide input

Business use of the information: Assess how the business is currently using information, under the four views of information.

Technology assessment: Assess how technology is being used to make use of information, under the four views of information.

Socio-political factors: Assess the current socio-political scenario that makes use of information, under the four views of information in order to understand the formal and informal structures of the organization and behavioural processes

Contingencies: Assess contingencies at an individual and organizational level.


12


Having the general IG framework as a

reference, this phase intends to lay down the

main directives that will guide the

implementation for the specific iteration that

has been defined (e.g. in a particular business

unit).

The main objective of this phase is to define

how the aspects of IG align to the information

relevant to govern. A way to achieve that is

shown in Figure 5 and described below. Refer

to Template □C for an example.

Identify business subjects involved

Determine information structuredness required

Determine views of information involved

Define roles

Define rules

Define policies

Define enforcing mechanisms

Identify information systems involved

Define infrastructure & architecture

needed

Set up security & access levels

Identify internal contingencies

Identify external contingencies

Identify a particular business objective to

tackle

Establish measures to evaluate the achievement of the business

objective

Establish measures to evaluate the execution

of socio-political aspects

Establish measures to evaluate the

implementation of technological aspects

Establish measures to evaluate the

management of contingencies

ORGANIZATIONAL STRATEGY ASPECTS

INFORMATIONSOCIO-POLITICAL

ASPECTSTECHNOLOGICAL

ASPECTSCONTINGENCIES

Establish measures

to evaluate the goals

established

Define goals expected

for the cycle

Establish measures to evaluate the definition of the information and the

goals defined

Figure 5: Planning a specific implementation

Define economic objective: Concentrate

attention on one particular business objective

that needs to be addressed. This objective

constitutes the driver of the iteration. If

considered appropriate, more than one

objective can be considered, otherwise

another business objective can be used to

trigger another iteration.

Profile the information required: The

organization needs to define the information

that is involved in the achievement of the

business objective. A way to describe it is by

defining business subjects, views of

information involved, and level of

structuredness required. Then, the specific

goals that need to be achieved during the

implementation cycle in relation to the

information described need to be established.

Establish socio-political aspects: Once the

required information is profiled, roles and

responsibilities around information can be

defined, as well as rules, policies, and

enforcing mechanisms.

Implement necessary technology: It is

important to assess the technological

platform required for example information

systems involved, infrastructure and

architecture needed, the security and access,

etc.

Cater for contingencies: It is also fundamental

to review internal and external contingencies

Plan

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal a

spe

cts

Contingencies

Organizational Strategy

INFORMATIONINFORMATION

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

INFORMATION

INFORMATIONTa

xono

my

angl

e

Content

angle

Format angle

INFORMATIONTa

xono

my

angl

e

Content

angle

Format angle


13


that may influence the implementation of the

implementation cycle.

Establish evaluation measures: Measures to

evaluate the implementation of the cycle

should be done not only for the particular

goals that are established for the particular

cycle (horizontal evaluation). The evaluation

should also be done for each one of the

aspects of information governance and for the

definition of information (vertical evaluation).

Financial and non-financial (e.g. perceptual

and behavioural) measures should be

considered. The organization has to decide on

the acceptance threshold for the measures

defined.

Additionally, another aspect that can be

considered during the plan phase is the

allocation of time and resources to implement

the iteration.

Consider a proof of concept

The first iteration can be considered as a

“pilot” or a “proof of concept” to identify

possible weaknesses and elements that may

jeopardise future iterations. Also having a

proof of concept helps demonstrate the

benefits intended.

Plan of a first iteration may include not only

tasks that start the cycle and occur once, it

may also include tasks that have to be

permanently monitored.

While planning, it is possible to find issues

that had not been considered before and that

might be beneficial to communicate to the

entire organization. Therefore it is advisable

to feed that information back to the general

IG framework to include those new elements.

Table 3: Plan phase

Definition Activities Examples of possible

instruments to be used People involved Deliverables

This phase represents a detailed planning of a particular iteration, focusing on aligning the aspects of information governance to the definition of organizational information. Also, approximate time scope and resources available should be established.

Organizational strategy aspects: Determine a business objective to be tackled

Example in Template □C

Workshops integrating specific users can provide input to clearly define the particular business objectives, the responsible roles, the appropriate technology and contingency plans.


Employees that will most likely be engaged with implementation and/or ongoing execution of governance.

Design document for the iteration including time line and resources for completion.

Information: Define organizational information to be governed and the information goals expected for the cycle

Socio-political aspects: Determine the specific rights, responsibilities and tasks of the roles. Determine rules, policies, and the mechanisms that will be implemented to enforce the decisions taken.

Technological aspects: Set specific technical objectives (in term of performance, version, compatibility, compliance, etc.) and understand in detail the aspects of the technology chosen.

Contingency impact: Understand details of remedial plans in order to clarify feasibility and determine an acceptable level where contingencies do not affect the general implementation.

Measures: Establish financial and non-financial measures to evaluate the information objectives set and the four aspects of information governance.

Allocation of resources and estimation of time: Prepare a time estimation of the activities that will be developed, as well as a clear definition of resources needed.


14


Deploy

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal a

spe

cts

Contingencies



Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

INFORMATIONINFORMATI

ONTaxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

INFORMATIONTa

xono

my

angl

e

Content

angle

Format angle

The aim of this phase is to implement the

actions defined in the plan phase for a

particular iteration, for example appointing

employees according to accountabilities and

responsibilities, communicating tasks and

responsibilities, applying changes related to

technological aspects of the information,

enforcing and communicating rules and

procedures, and triggering remedial plans of

action for contingencies if needed.

Table 4: Deploy phase



This phase implements the actions planned for a particular iteration.

Business strategy aspects: Have the specific business objective as reference for the rest of the elements that are being implemented

General meeting to announce the responsibilities assigned to each role.

Use of the corporate website to communicate roles and responsibilities

Employees appointed for tasks defined in the planning phase

External aid for contingency issues, if needed

Delivery of the activities planned

Socio-political aspects: Appoint employees according to accountabilities and responsibilities

Enforce and communicate tasks and actions taken

Technological aspects: Implement changes related to technological aspects of the information or acquire new technology

Contingency impact: Trigger remedial plan of action for contingencies if needed


15


Evaluate

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal a

spe

cts

Contingencies



Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

INFORMATIONINFORMATI

ONTaxo

nom

y an

gle

Content

angle

Format angle

INFORMATIONTa

xono

my

angl

e

Content

angle

Format angle

Within a specific-level focus, this phase

evaluates the obtained results according to

the measures set during the planning phase.

The results obtained are compared against

the financial and non-financial measures set

for the information goals and each aspect of

information governance. Financial measures

refer to the traditional quantitative measures

of management control e.g.: return on

investment, return on net assets, total cost,

cash flow, profit margin, etc. In the context of

this implementation, non-financial measures

particularly fit the evaluation of perceptions,

attitudes, or behaviours related to the socio-

political aspect of the implementation. This

aspect involves human interaction and

acceptance of the implementation which

could trigger particular attitudes and

behaviours. Template □D presents some

approaches that can be considered to

measure attitudes. Those approaches are

provided as a reference only, since the team

in charge of the implementation should

decide on the appropriateness to apply a

particular approach in the organization

considering the culture and existing

evaluation policies. It is advisable to work with

the human resources team in order to

understand the appropriateness of the

approaches in specific contexts.

If the result of the evaluation obtained for

financial and non-financial measures is

positive, it is possible to continue performing

the activities that require a permanent

execution. If the result of the evaluation is not

satisfactory, it is necessary to go back to the

plan or the deployment phases to correct the

faulty aspects in the particular

implementation.

Table 5: Evaluate phase



Evaluate the obtained results according to the measure set in the plan phase.

Information goals: Compare information goals established during the plan phase against the results obtained.

Workshop with the users that attended the design phase in order to collect opinions and impressions

Employee and team attitude assessment,

Template □D can be

used as a guide.


The committees that acted as enforced mechanisms

Responsible roles listed in the plan and design phases

Report addressing each objective that was attempted and the results obtained

Set of recommendations to correct specific issues

Set of recommendations to incorporate in the general planning

Business strategy aspects: Compare economic results obtained for a particular objective before and after the cycle is implemented.

Socio-political aspects: Compare people’s performance according to the tasks and responsibilities set for the role set during the design phase.

Technological aspects: Compare technical goals set against goals established.

Contingency impact: Assess impact of contingencies against the acceptable level established.


16


4. How to implement IG in different scenarios?

Each organization may have a different purpose

when deciding to implement an information

governance framework, and therefore the

nature of the iterations at a specific level may

have different characteristics. This section

presents three examples where the method

could be applied considering different scenarios

chosen by an organization:

Iterations based on business units or

functional areas.

Iterations based on business objectives.

Iterations based on the views of

information.

Iterations based on business units or functional areas

An organization that has fairly autonomous

business units or functional areas may decide

to opt for an implementation that targets each

area in each iteration. In this scenario it is

important to have a good overview of the

activities, technology, and resources that may

be shared by more than one area. Each

iteration needs to acknowledge what has been

implemented by another iteration so as to

complement efforts rather than produce

incompatible scenarios (e.g. contradicting

policies or rules). In consequence, the work

done during the establishment of the general

information governance framework becomes

fundamental in order to coordinate the efforts

of the different areas. Figure 6 presents a

generic diagram of implementation driven by

business units or functional areas.

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

Evaluate

Plan

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Deploy

Evaluate

Deploy

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies

Organizational StrategyPlan

INFORMATION

INFORMATION

INFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATION

Business unit A

Business unit B

Business unit N

1st IterationBusiness unit (functional area) A implements the information governance framework aligning its particular objectives to the views of information and aspects of governance. The first iteration can be considered as a proof of concept for the rest of the areas

Nth IterationBusiness unit (functional area) N implements the information governance framework aligning its particular objectives to the views of information and aspects of governance.

2nd IterationBusiness unit (functional area) B implements the information governance framework aligning its particular objectives to the views of information and aspects of governance.

Figure 6: Iterations driven by business units or functional areas


17


Iterations based on views of information

Iterations based on the views of information

may be considered in a scenario where an

organization perceives that the whole

information lifecycle needs to be reviewed. For

example in a situation when important data is

not being collected, when there is data sitting

in different systems that needs to be

integrated, when keeping data updated across

all those systems is not easy, when it is hard to

extract meaning out of the existing

information, and when it is tough to

understand what information is necessary to

strive for competitive advantage. The structure

of an information governance framework

might then be determined by the emphasis

given to the views of information. The

organization might first concentrate attention

on the more structural aspects of information

(data) in a first iteration, i.e. the token and

syntax views. Then, the implementation may

define a second iteration to focus on the

analysis and interpretation of information by

designing guidelines on the representation and

adaptation views. Figure 7 presents how the

implementation would look in this scenario. It

is important to keep in mind that the transition

from one iteration to the next does not imply

that the first iteration has finished. The cycle

Plan-Deploy-Evaluate determines a continuous

process of improvement. Also, the new

iteration has to complement the previous one

and provide feedback when necessary.

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

Evaluate

Deploy

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

INFORMATION


Token & Syntax

views of information

Representation &

Adaptationviews of

information

1st IterationExample Objectives: Collect, store, and

process accurate data that may be missing from existing systems

Integrate data existing in different systems

2nd IterationExample objectives: Analyse and interpret

information extracted from systems

Identify and use internal and external information to trigger changes that represent competitive advantage

Figure 7: Implementation driven by the views of information


18


Iterations based on business objectives

An organization may be interested in

structuring its information environment

around specific business objectives or business

processes in order to focus attention on

particular indicators or KPIs. In that scenario,

particular goals determine the implementation

of the specific iterations that will be deployed

across different business units.

For example an organization may set as a goal

to become a customer centric organization.

That goal may transcend functional areas and

may be related to different views of

information. Therefore each of the iterations

need to consider a particular business

objective as a starting point and then align that

business objective to the relevant views of

information and the other aspects of

governance (socio-political, technological, and

contingencies).

Figure 8 displays how an implementation by

business objectives may be approached.

IG Framework

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Plan Deploy

Evaluate

Evaluate

Plan

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

Deploy

Evaluate

Deploy

Socio

-po

liticalasp

ects

Tech

no

logi

cal

asp

ect

s

Contingencies


INFORMATION

INFORMATION

INFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATIONINFORMATION

Business objective 1

Business objective 2

Business objective N

1st IterationAll views of information and the rest of the governance aspects are aligned around business objective 1.

Nth IterationAll views of information and the rest of the governance aspects are aligned around business objective N.

2nd IterationAll views of information and the rest of the governance aspects are aligned around business objective 2.

Figure 8: Implementation driven by business objectives


19


5. Summary

This document presented one way to

conceptualise information governance and one

way to approach its implementation which

resulted from ongoing empirical research. The

core assumption of the approach is to

recognise that organizations have different

purposes when implementing information and

those purposes are very much influenced by

the way organizations look at information and

from what organizations expect from it.

Once the organization understands the

information they want to stress, it is necessary

to harmonise that definition with socio-

political aspects in order to determine the

allocation of responsibilities and specific tasks.

An organization may determine for example

that decisions about the shape of information

as tokens (data) should be solely the

responsibility of IT and that the representation

of information should be left exclusively to the

business. Another company may decide to

have mixed groups making decisions on both

views.

Also, economic aspects (e.g. organizational

strategy and business objectives) that are

fundamental to the organization need to be

considered in the alignment of an information

governance framework, as well as

technological aspects in order to determine

how infrastructure, architecture, technical

tools, and applications will support the

information governance environment. Finally,

internal and external contingencies should be

understood in order to determine the way

those influence the implementation. In

consequence, the central element of the

implementation of an information governance

framework is the way an organization

understands how information aligns to the

aspects of governance.

Then, the task is to decide the best way an

incremental implementation would work for

the organization: deploying it by business unit,

by business objectives, by project, by view of

information, etc.

It is clear that each organization will have its

own way to implement an information

governance framework, and the guidelines

provided by this research are by no means

static and final. The guidelines are open to

further evolution and refinement, triggered

not only by the opinions of experts, but also by

the actual use and needs of each organization.

20

TEMPLATES

□&

EXAMPLES

for

Information

Governance

Implementation

21

Template □A : Value statement for the information governance framework

The following outline can be considered to prepare the value statement for the implementation of

information governance. It can be prepared as a single document or divided as the company considers fit.

The following items should be considered as a minimum to make the case for the implementation.

1. Objectives of the implementation

State the reasons why information governance is being adopted in the organization

Refer to the problems that will be addressed with the implementation of information governance

Clearly state the objectives of the information governance framework

Refer to how the information governance framework supports the values, mission, or vision of the

organization

State an overview of the tangible and intangible benefits expected from the implementation

2. Define the business strategy followed by the organization

Define the most important business objectives or business strategy that has to be supported by the

information governance implementation.

There are different ways in which the strategy of the company can be viewed. Three examples of those

different perspectives are presented in the table below.

Perspective Description Types

Strategic types3

Under this perspective organizations can be classified according to the way they take risk and penetrate the market.

Defender

Organization that holds a stable domain of the market, preventing competitors from entering their domain by setting competitive prices or producing high quality products. They aim at risk reduction.

Prospector Organization that tries to find and exploit new products and market opportunities, therefore taking risk in order to increase market penetration.

Analyser Organization that adopts an intermediate position. They are able to act fast following the lead of key prospectors while maintaining operating efficiency within their domain.

Reactor Organization that demonstrates an unstable and inconsistent pattern of adjustment. It constitutes a ‘residual’ strategy resulting from inappropriately implementing the other three.

Value proposition4

Under this perspective organizations leverage what they are good at and focus their effort on that.

Operational excellence

The organization concentrates most of its efforts on delivering reliable products or services with minimal difficulty.

Product leadership

The organization concentrates most of its efforts on constantly delivering innovative state-of-the-art products or services.

Customer intimacy

The organization concentrates most of its efforts on offering the customer a total solution, not just a product or service.

Strategic dimensions5

Under this perspective organizations cover five strategic dimensions, emphasising some more than others. That emphasis is what finally determines the general business strategy of the company.

Growth It refers to how the organization is planning to expand, for example by introducing new products or achieving greater market share.

Innovation It refers to the way the organization embraces original thinking.

Complexity It refers to how the organization understands and makes use of the value extracted from sophisticated processes or products.

Agility It refers to the ability to respond rapidly to change.

Investment It shows the level of immediate versus long-term gain expected.

3 Miles, R. E., Snow, C. C., Meyer, A. D., & Coleman, J. H. J. (1978). Organizational Strategy, Structure, and Process. Academy of Management

Review, 3(3), 546-562. 4 Treacy, M., & Wiersema, F. (1995). The discipline of market leaders: Choose your customers, narrow your focus, dominate your market.

Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. 5 Hillard, R. (2010). Information-driven business. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

22

3. People initially involved

Define who will be the sponsor(s) of the programme

Define the members of the information council (the information council is a group of senior executives

that will make decisions around information, referee disputes in relation to information issues, and

establish how exemptions will be handled. The council does not necessarily deal with technical data

aspects only –token or syntax view – most importantly they deal with the representation of information

and its use for adaptation)

Recommend a team that will kick-off the diagnose phase

4. Define organizational information

Establish a general concept of what is the information that is expected to be governed. The taxonomy,

format, and content angles may be used as a reference.

A table like the one below may be useful to understand and classify organizational information.

<------- Define format expected ---------> <----------------------------------- Define taxonomy view to stress ------------------------------>

Structured Unstructured Token Syntax Representation Adaptation

<---

----

Def

ine

bu

sin

ess

sub

ject

s --

----

>

<Define a business subject>

<If needed, define sources where to

obtain it>

<If needed, define sources where to

obtain it>

<If needed, define tokens of interest>

<If needed, define syntax aspects of

interest>

<If needed, define representational

aspects of interest>

<If needed, define adaptational

aspects of interest>

E.g. Customer

E.g. - Data base “Marketing” in server RS2-1 - Data base “Customer Service” in server RS2-2

E.g. - Invoices filed by marketing department - Written call registers in customer service call centre

E.g. - Personal information about the customer - Historical address data - Total spending data

E.g. -Metadata to describe personal information about the customer

E.g. - Information to determine segmentation of the customer according to sales -Information to determine the areas in customer service that need improvement

E.g. -Information that would positively change the way we relate with the customer

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

5. Identify the value of information and prioritise

Although determining a specific number to the value of information is a difficult task, some

pointers are provided in order to guide the estimation:

- If previous information management projects have already been implemented, use them

as reference to highlight the benefits obtained in terms of profit or cost cutting.

- If the emphasis of the IG framework is on the token or the syntax view of information

probably a more structured normative approach could be used by applying some

quantitative model or decision rules. Some techniques (e.g. payoff function) can be

reviewed in Feltham (1968)6.

- A more subjective, but attainable estimation of information value can be obtained by

collecting the perception of people that use the information, for example from decision

makers and key information users. Questionnaires, surveys, or interviews can be used to

gather perceptions. An example of a question that could be asked is: ‘Assume that your

company plans to eliminate all data processing and to obtain this report from another firm.

What is the maximum amount you would recommend paying for this report for you to

use?’.7 Also review Hillard (2010) for more details.

8

Once information value has been identified, it is necessary to prioritise which information is

most valuable, in order to concentrate effort on that information.

6 Feltham, G. A. (1968). The Value of Information. Accounting Review, 43(4), 684-696 7 Gallagher, C. (1974). Perceptions of the value of a management information system. Academy of Management Journal, 17(1), 46-55. 8 Hillard, R. (2010). Information-driven business. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

(Template □A continued)

23

6. Boundaries of the implementation

Clearly identify the outer boundary that will define the implementation. Some organizations have

structures that make external partners key in the flow of information, therefore it is necessary to

consider if implementation of information governance will cover or have an effect on those key

partners. Boundaries can be defined considering any or a combination of the following9:

An efficiency perspective: At which point the cost of governance activities is minimised?

This perspective is recommended for environments with high price competition and stable

structures but lack of knowledge about future states.

A power perspective: At which point the organization has the appropriate sphere of influence

to maximise control over external forces?

Recommended in environments with well-defined players (e.g. regulated environments) and

ambiguous and/or dynamics environments where organizations constantly try to consolidate

their sphere of influence.

A competence perspective: At which point the organization maximises its resource portfolio?

It is especially relevant in environments where there is a fast pace of change and high

technological uncertainty.

An identity perspective: Where is the balance point between the identity of the organization

and its activities?

This type of boundaries is especially relevant when there are strong institutional forces and

high level of ambiguity with lack of clear structures.

7. Estimate a general economic benefit

Based on the understanding of the economic value of information in the organization, attempt an

estimation of the economic benefit brought by the implementation in terms of direct or indirect profit

or cost reduction.

8. Define the nature of the cycles of implementation

State the drivers of the particular cycles of implementation, for example the cycles are defined for each

business unit, or for a particular project, or for a particular business objective, etc. Once the nature of

the iterations has been decided, it is important to prioritise the order of execution of the iterations. Two

techniques that can be used are the prioritization quadrant analysis10

and the prioritization matrix11

.

Prioritization quadrant analysis

Priority of the iterations is decided according to the level of feasibility and level of business impact. High

impact in both aspects will determine higher priority. Figure 9 presents an example where the rounds

have been decided around the general business objectives. General business objectives in the right

upper quadrant will be implemented first.

9 Santos, F. M., & Eisenhardt, K. M. (2005). Organizational Boundaries and Theories of Organization. Organization Science, 16(5), 491-508. 10

Presented in Kimball, R., Ross, M., Thornthwaite, W., Mundy, J., & Becker, B. (2008). The data warehouse lifecycle toolkit. Indianapolis, IN:

Wiley Publishing. 11

Presented in Kettinger, W. J., Teng, J. T. C., & Guha, S. (1996). Information architectural design in business process reengineering. Journal

of Information Technology, 11(1), 27-37


24

High

HighLow

Low

Business impact

Feasibility

GBO2

GBO6GBO5

GBO1

GBO4

Figure 9: Prioritisation quadrant analysis

Prioritization matrix

Priority is decided according to the essential and desirable elements that will contribute to the

achievement of critical success factors. As shown in Figure 10, the row headings of a matrix list the

iteration criteria (e.g. the business objectives to tackle). The column headings contain critical success

factors (CSF) or strategic metrics defined by the company. The cells that represent the intersection of a

business objective with a CSF are assigned an E (essential) or a D (desirable). The letters are also

assigned a value (E=2; D=1). When adding the values of a row, a total value can be established for an

objective. A high score represents a business objective that deserves more attention.

E

E

E

E

E

E

E E

E

EE

D

D D

DD

D

D

D

D

D

3

4

5

2

1

7 (*)

6 (*)

5

D

E= Essential (2 points) D= Desirable (1 points)

CSF1 CSF2 CSF3 CSF4 CSF5 CSF6 Total

GBO2

GBO6

GBO5

GBO1

GBO7

GBO8

GBO4

GBO3

Figure 10: Prioritisation matrix

9. Define general regulatory framework

State general core policies that will have to be followed by the whole organization. Make sure policies

are general enough not to stifle future implementation in terms of innovation and creativity.


25

Template □B : Assessment of the current situation of the organization under the taxonomy angle

Token Syntax Representation Adaptation

Business use of the information

From a business point of view, is there an established process to define what information is important to collect?

Does the business have a systematic way to determine how consistent information contained across different systems is?

Is the company associating specific economic value to the information they possess?

What are the channels managers and analysts use to detect internal and external changes?

How does the process of interpreting if changes affect the organization happens?

Technology assessment

What technologies/platforms are used across the organization to store, process, and retrieve data?

What systems keep track of data anomalies?

Is data entry and data validation efficient across all systems?

Is data format accounted for?

How is integrity of the data managed?

Is there any process of integration of different data bases?

How is metadata managed in the organization?

Are similar values of data being tracked across different data bases?

Is there appropriate infrastructure to carry appropriate data integration?

What information systems are used for analysis of the information (e.g. reporting, BI, etc.)

How is organizational data architecture supporting the analysis of data?

Is information perceived as accurate, consistent, and complete?

Do users receive information when they need it?

Are there systems that help users understand where data quality issues originate (data management tools)?

What technology is being used to identify changes and differences in the environment that really signify a change in the way things are done internally?

Socio-political factors

Who decides access to what type of information?

Who enforces the rules to data storage, access, etc.?

What are the policies and rules to store data?

What are the policies for data access?

Are there incentives to improve and maintain good data quality?

Are there any policies/rules to follow regarding integration of data from different sources (e.g. different business units)?

How is data integration managed by the owners of the information?

Are there specific roles in the organization in charge of making sense of the information contained in the data bases?

Are there people that without being directly responsible influence the analysis of the information?

Is there any mechanism to ensure the uniform interpretation of the data?

Is management aware of the importance of information use and management?

Are employees allowed to have a different perspective to the common understanding of the information?

Is there a data steering committee in place with strategic responsibilities?

Who decides on how to react to change?

Contingencies

According to the industry, is the company collecting sufficient information to remain competitive?

Is the company collecting and providing the data required by regulatory bodies?

What environmental factors affect appropriate data integration?

Do employees have enough training/skills to interpret information?

Do employees have enough time to interpret information?

How would you describe the external environment of the company?

How does organizational culture embrace change and adaptation?

26

Template □C : Example of alignment of information to a particular business objective

12

See Weill, P., & Ross, J. (2004, p.120). IT governance: How top performers manage IT decision rights for superior results. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

ORGANIZATIONAL

STRATEGY

INFORMATION

SOCIO-POLITICAL ASPECTS

TECHNOLOGICAL ASPECTS CONTINGENCIES

General business objective (GBO)

Role responsible

Enforcing Mechanism

Technology involved Contingencies to consider→ Way to

address them METRICS

GBO1 : Improve the relationship with the customer

Cu

sto

mer

, Sa

les

Stru

ctu

red

Token

Collect missing data about customers (e.g. date of birth, number of times customer has called, etc.)

CIO Data architecture committee

- System A, System B: Incorporate new fields for data entry and new columns in data base.

- Automate loading of flat files and Excel files to populate existing fields into System C

- Validation tools to ensure entry of clean the data

- Collection of personal information of interest may be restricted in some states → Establish disclaimers as requested by state law

-Percentage of total data completed for each item defined - Cost of administrative error/management revenues (%)

Syntax

Determine the accuracy of the relationship between fields about the customer contained in different data sources and produce integration where a unique identifier is missing

CIO Data architecture committee

- Data analysis tool to compare data to identify a single customer

- Master data management tools

-Percentage of correct matches

Stru

ctu

red

& U

nst

ruct

ure

d

Representation

Understand what are the areas in customer service we need to pay attention Determine common definitions and metrics around the customer

CEO, Leader BU1

Customer Service committee

- Adopt a BI platform to generate reports and analyse the information (adapt current data architecture and infrastructure)

- Not all analysts have training in OLAP tools→ Establish internal training plan

-Level of confidence detected in key stakeholders -Customers acquired/lost -Average duration of customer relationship (#)

Adaptation

Identify ideas or activities that would positively change the way we relate with the customer

CEO, Leader BU1, Leader BU2

Executive committee

- Social media - Current corporate culture does

not embrace chance easily → Consider workshops

-Level of satisfaction detected in key stakeholders -Satisfied customer index (%)

MET

RIC

S

-Return on investment -Percent change in revenue -Profit margin -Total cost -Sales/customer ($)

-Perception of the precision of the definition of information -Perception of usefulness of the definition of information

-Level of perception of role involvement -Attitude towards IG role -Percentage of managers that can describe governance12

-IT expense -Effective use of IT for cost control, growth, asset utilisation, business flexibility12

- Number of resolved issues - Percentage of trained users - Percentage of attendance to workshops

Template □D : Approaches that can be used to measure attitudes towards the implementation

Please note: The approaches to evaluate attitudes presented in this table should be used as a reference only. Practitioners are encouraged to adapt the

information to their organization considering the organization’s culture, policies on evaluation, etc. It is also advisable to discuss the evaluation with the

human resources team.

Approach13 Description When the approach is appropriate Techniques that can be used to

gather data What kind of questions can be answered by the measures?

Examples of the conclusions the measures can yield

Self-reports

Employees report about their own attitude

When people are able to understand the questions, have sufficient self-awareness to provide information, and are likely to answer honestly.

Interviews, surveys, polls

Questionnaire, and attitude rating scales

Logs, journals, diaries

How do you feel about the implementation of this programme?

What do you believe will be the results of the programme?

How do you feel about the role you play in the implementation?

(How) has the programme changed the way you do things?

(How) has the programme changed your attitude towards work?

How well do you know the objectives of the implementation?

How well do you know the structure of the implementation

Staff members are (well/not) aware of the objectives of the implementation

Staff members are highly/neutrally/poorly satisfied with the implementation of the programme

Staff members are satisfied with the role they play in the implementation

Reports of others

Employees report about the attitudes of other employees

When it is assumed the reporter is unbiased and presents objective information

When the reporter has sufficient opportunity to observe a representative sample of behaviour

When information about how people behave under certain circumstances is needed

When people under investigation are unlikely to provide accurate or reliable information

Interviews

Questionnaires

Logs, journals, reports

Observation procedures

From your observation of X:

What do they believe about the success of the implementation?

How do they feel about it?

What do they do when confronted with a new task?

How do they cope with change?

How do they comply with rules?

How do they perform their assigned role?

How do they feel about the related technology implemented?

How do they cope with restraining contingencies?

How well do they know the objectives and structure of the implementation?

Employees perceive a significant improvement in terms of knowledge and involvement with the programme.

Direct managers report that staff members are fully/scarcely aware of the benefits of the programme

Observers report that employees have (no) problem complying with rules and procedures

Sociometric procedures

Employees report about their attitudes toward one another

When it is necessary to ha a picture of the social patterns within the group

Peer rating

Social choice techniques

As a member of X, who in your group fits this description:

Does (not) worry about data/information integrity

Is a (good/poor) custodian of information about Z

Is (not) aware of his role in the implementation

Does (not) accommodate to changes well

The sociometric choices of employees indicate that the implementation is (not) being well received and understood.

Records Records are reviewed

When there is access to complete records that provide information relevant to the attitudes in question

Meeting minutes

Emails

Documents

Business reports

What inferences can be made from records concerning the general feeling of the implementation?

What do records say about employees’ involvement in the programme?

What records say about employees’ awareness about the importance of the programme?

Employees involvement and knowledge of the implementation is increasingly (good/worrying)

13

Henerson, M., Morris, L., & Fitz-Gibbon, C. (1988). How to measure attitudes. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE Publications.

Contact Information

Emeritus Prof David Arnott

[email protected]

Dr Robert Meredith

[email protected]

Ms Sindy Madrid Torres

[email protected]

Copyright © 2014 Monash University

Faculty of Information Technology

Caulfield Campus


mailto:[email protected]

