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.
The vast literature on accountability in the public sector (usually called ‘public accountability’originating from political science and public administration tends to emphasize the positive dimension of holding authorities to account. As formulated by one prominent scholar in the field, ‘[a]ccountability has become an icon for good governance’: it is perceived as ‘a Good Thing, and, so it seems, we can’t have enough of it’ (Bovens, 2005: 182, 183). Accountability has, thus, become one of the central values of democratic rule – varying on a well-known American slogan one could phrase this as ‘no public responsi bility without accountability’.
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.
Moderatie van lezersreacties onder nieuwsartikelen is erg arbeidsintensief. Met behulp van kunstmatige intelligentie wordt moderatie mogelijk tegen een redelijke prijs. Aangezien elke toepassing van kunstmatige intelligentie eerlijk en transparant moet zijn, is het belangrijk om te onderzoeken hoe media hieraan kunnen voldoen.Doel Dit promotieproject zal zich richten op de rechtvaardigheid, accountability en transparantie van algoritmische systemen voor het modereren van lezersreacties. Het biedt een theoretisch kader en bruikbare matregelen die nieuwsorganisaties zullen ondersteunen in het naleven van recente beleidsvorming voor een waardegedreven implementatie van AI. Nu steeds meer nieuwsmedia AI gaan gebruiken, moeten ze rechtvaardigheid, accountability en transparantie in hun gebruik van algoritmen meenemen in hun werkwijzen. Resultaten Hoewel moderatie met AI zeer aantrekkelijk is vanuit economisch oogpunt, moeten nieuwsmedia weten hoe ze onnauwkeurigheid en bias kunnen verminderen (fairness), de werking van hun AI bekendmaken (accountability) en de gebruikers laten begrijpen hoe beslissingen via AI worden genomen (transparancy). Dit proefschrift bevordert de kennis over deze onderwerpen. Looptijd 01 februari 2022 - 01 februari 2025 Aanpak De centrale onderzoeksvraag van dit promotieonderzoek is: Hoe kunnen en moeten nieuwsmedia rechtvaardigheid, accountability en transparantie in hun gebruik van algoritmes voor commentmoderatie? Om deze vraag te beantwoorden is het onderzoek opgesplitst in vier deelvragen. Hoe gebruiken nieuwsmedia algoritmes voor het modereren van reacties? Wat kunnen nieuwsmedia doen om onnauwkeurigheid en bias bij het modereren via AI van reacties te verminderen? Wat moeten nieuwsmedia bekendmaken over hun gebruik van moderatie via AI? Wat maakt uitleg van moderatie via AI begrijpelijk voor gebruikers van verschillende niveaus van digitale competentie?
Smart city technologies, including artificial intelligence and computer vision, promise to bring a higher quality of life and more efficiently managed cities. However, developers, designers, and professionals working in urban management have started to realize that implementing these technologies poses numerous ethical challenges. Policy papers now call for human and public values in tech development, ethics guidelines for trustworthy A.I., and cities for digital rights. In a democratic society, these technologies should be understandable for citizens (transparency) and open for scrutiny and critique (accountability). When implementing such public values in smart city technologies, professionals face numerous knowledge gaps. Public administrators find it difficult to translate abstract values like transparency into concrete specifications to design new services. In the private sector, developers and designers still lack a ‘design vocabulary’ and exemplary projects that can inspire them to respond to transparency and accountability demands. Finally, both the public and private sectors see a need to include the public in the development of smart city technologies but haven’t found the right methods. This proposal aims to help these professionals to develop an integrated, value-based and multi-stakeholder design approach for the ethical implementation of smart city technologies. It does so by setting up a research-through-design trajectory to develop a prototype for an ethical ‘scan car’, as a concrete and urgent example for the deployment of computer vision and algorithmic governance in public space. Three (practical) knowledge gaps will be addressed. With civil servants at municipalities, we will create methods enabling them to translate public values such as transparency into concrete specifications and evaluation criteria. With designers, we will explore methods and patterns to answer these value-based requirements. Finally, we will further develop methods to engage civil society in this processes.
This Impuls 2020 proposal of ArtEZ University of the Arts focuses on strengthening the institutional structure and organizational infrastructure of its Research and Outreach Unit, by developing and building ArtEZ Research & Outreach. ArtEZ Research & Outreach is a centralized research incubation and development space to facilitate the large communities of researchers at ArtEZ. Based on the portfolio of diverse practices, disciplinary competences, and domain expertise, it explores and develops common grounds for new ways of shared, de-disciplined research and outreach activities across the university and with relevant external partners and stakeholders. The 2 key areas in which Impuls-activities will be performed are: 1. Strategic Research Programming and Networking – Aligning expertise, combining research resources and developing strategic networks Our first objective is to define a long-term Strategic Research Program, to set the directions of urgent and future-proof research topics, directly related to needs and demands from internal (research, education) and external (societal, industrial) stakeholders, with the ambition to create maximum value and impact for researchers, students and professionals and preserving the power of art. This area also includes networking, to develop diverse multi-stakeholder consortia within and around the selected strategic research topics. Our objective is to create multi-lateral exchanges, bringing people together in diverse communities for building consortia to prepare for joint practices of research, impact, accountability, and intervention towards collective research development. 2. Professional Research Support Infrastructure We need to develop and professionalize our research support infrastructure to facilitate professors and researchers in preparing, performing and managing (organizationally and financially) their research projects. The ambition is to increase ArtEZ’ participation in projects for research in the arts, from networking to dissemination and implementation of the research results and output, by developing a strong and sustainable research portfolio and financing strategy.
