Search results

The theoretical framework of the ‘Archive-as-Is’.

Reconstructing the Past for Organizational Accountability

Many organizations have undergone substantial reorganization in the last decade. They re-engineered their business processes and exchanged proprietary, not integrated applications for more standard solutions. Integration of structured data in relational databases has improved documentation of business transactions and increased data quality. But almost 90% of the information that organizations manage is unstructured, cannot easily be integrated into a traditional database. When used for organizational actions and transactions, structured and unstructured information are records. They are meant and used as evidence. Governments, courts and other stakeholders are making increasing demands for the trustworthiness of records. An analysis of literature of the information, organization and archival sciences illustrates that accountability needs the reconstruction of the past. Hypothesis of this paper is that for the reconstruction of the past each organization needs a combination of threemechanisms: enterprise records management, organizational memory and records auditing. Enterprise records management ensures that records meet the quality requirements needed for accountability: integrity, authenticity, controllability and historicity. They ensure records that can be trusted and enhance the possibilities for the reconstruction of the past. The organizational memory ensures that trusted records are preserved for as long as is necessary to comply with accountability regulations. It provides an ICT infrastructure to (indefinitely) store those records and to keep them accessible. Records auditing researches the first two mentioned mechanisms to assess the possibility to reconstruct past organizational actions and transactions. These mechanisms ensure that organizations have a documented understanding of [1] the processing of actions and transactions within business processes; [2] the dissemination of trusted records; [3] the way the organization accounts for the actions and transactions within its business processes; and [4] the reconstruction of actions and transactions from business processes over time. This understanding is crucial for the reconstruction of the past and for organizational accountability.

Enterprise Architecture for Network Organizations

Abstract Healthcare organizations operate within a network of governments, insurers, inspection services and other healthcare organizations to provide clients with the best possible care. The parties involved must collaborate and are accountable to each other for the care provided. This has led to a diversity of administrative processes that are supported by a multi-system landscape, resulting in administrative burdens among healthcare professionals. Management methods, such as Enterprise Architecture (EA), should help to develop and manage such landscapes, but they are systematic, while the network of healthcare parties is dynamic. The aim of this research is therefore to develop an EA framework that fits the dynamics of network organizations (such as long-term healthcare). This research proposal outlines the practical and scientific relevance of this research and the proposed method. The current status and next steps are also described.

An accountability challenge

More than 80 % of all information in an organization is unstructured, created by knowledge workers engaged in peer-to-peer networks of expertise to share knowledge across organizational boundaries. Enterprise Information Systems (EIS) do not integrate unstructured information. At best, they integrate links to unstructured information connected with structured information in their databases. The amount of unstructured information is rising quickly. Ensuring the quality of this unstructured information is difficult. It is often inaccessible, unavailable, incomplete, irrelevant, untimely, inaccurate, and/or incomprehensible. It becomes problematic to reconstruct what has happened in organizations. When used for organizational policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions, structured and unstructured information are called records. They are an entity of information, consisting out of an information object (structured or unstructured) and its metadata. They are important for organizational accountability and business process performance, for without them reconstruction of past happenings and meaningful production become an impossibility. Organization-wide management of records is not a common functionality for EIS, resulting in [1] a fragmentation in the management of records, where structured and unstructured information objects are stored in a variety of systems, unconnected with their metadata; [2] a fragmentation in metadata management, leading to a loss of contextuality because metadata are separated from their information objects; and [3] a declining quality or records, because their provenance, integrity, and preservation are in peril. Organizational accountability is based on records and their context to reconstruct the past. Because records are not controlled by EIS, they can only marginally be used for accountability. The challenge for organizational accountability is to generate trusted records, fixed and contextual information objects inseparately linked with metadata that capture context to regain evidential value and to allow for the reconstruction of the past. The research question of this paper is how to capture records and their context within EIS to regain the evidential value of records to allow for a more robust organizational accountability. To find an answer, we need to pay attention to the concept of context, on how to capture context in metadata, and how to embed and manage records in EIS.

A Sound of silence

In 2017, I introduced a new theoretical framework in Archival Science, that of the ‘Archive–as–Is’. This framework proposes a theoretical foundation for Enterprise Information Management (EIM) in World 2.0, the virtual, interactive, and hyper connected platform that is developing around us. This framework should allow EIM to end the existing ‘information chaos’, to computerize information management, to improve the organizational ability to reach business objectives, and to define business strategies. The concepts of records and archives are crucial for those endeavours. The framework of the ‘Archive–as–Is’ is an organization–oriented archival theory, consisting of five components, namely: [1] four dimensions of information, [2] two archival principles, [3] five requirements of information accessibility, [4] the information value chain; and [5] organizational behaviour. In this paper, the subject of research is component 5 of the framework: organizational behaviour. Behaviour of employees (including archivists) is one of the most complicated aspects within organizations when creating, processing, managing, and preserving information, records, and archives. There is an almost universal ‘sound of silence’ in scholarly literature from archival and information studies although this subject and its effects on information management are studied extensively in many other disciplines, like psychology, sociology, anthropology, and organization science. In this paper, I want to study how and why employees behave as they do when they are working with records and archives and how EIM is influenced by this behaviour.

Enterprise 2.0.

In the last decade, organizations have re-engineered their business processes and started using standard software solutions. Integration of structured data in relational databases has improved documentation of business transactions and increased data quality. But almost 90% of the information cannot be integrated in relational data bases. This amount of ‘unstructured’ information is exploding within the Enterprise 2.0. The use of social media tools to enhance collaboration, creates corporate blogs, wikis, forums, and other types of unstructured information. Structured and unstructured information are records, meant and used as evidence for policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions. Most stakeholders are making increasing demands for the trustworthiness of records for accountability reasons. In this age of evolving social media use, organizational chains, inter-organizational data warehouses and cloud computing, it is crucial for the Enterprise 2.0. that its policies, decisions, products, actions and transactions can be reliably reconstructed in context. Digital Archiving is a necessity for the Enterprise 2.0.: the reconstruction of the past depends on records and their meta data. Blogs, wikis, forums, etc., used for collaboration within the business processes of the organization, need to be documented for reconstruction in the future. Digital Archiving is a combination of three mechanisms: enterprise records management, organizational memory and records auditing. These mechanisms ensure that a digitized organization as the Enterprise 2.0. has a documented understanding of its past. In that way, it improves organizational accountability.