PSCIOC IM Sub-Committee E-Records Project

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "PSCIOC IM Sub-Committee E-Records Project"

Jordan Atkinson
7 years ago
Views:

1 PSCIOC IM Sub-Committee E-Records Project Results from E-Records Survey September 14-16, 2010 Whitehorse, YK

2 Table of Contents Purpose Background E-Records Survey Project Findings and Opportunities Challenges Collaboration Opportunities Next Steps Annex A Maturity Model 2

3 Purpose To present the results of the E-Records Survey that has provided a profile of the current status of E- Record activities across jurisdictions. To identify associated challenges and opportunities for collaboration. 3

4 Background Jurisdictions at all levels are facing similar challenges associated with the management of the exponential growth of electronic information. PSCIOC IM Sub-Committee identified E-Records management capacity as a priority area for potential crossjurisdiction collaboration on best practices. PSCIOC requested that IM Sub-Committee report on the results of a survey on current E-Records activities across jurisdictions to support a discussion at the next PSCIOC meeting. 4

PSCIOC IM Sub-Committee identified E-Records management capacity as a priority area for potential crossjurisdiction

5 E-Records Survey Project Objective: To identify the potential for sharing best practices across federal-provincial jurisdictions in the area of E-Records management. Approach: Conduct a survey on current E-Records activities across jurisdictions: Develop survey instrument and administer to jurisdictional representatives Focus on EDRM activities Use a Maturity Model to measure current activity Collect and analyze data with follow ups, as required Prepare report and present results to PSCIOC 5

Approach: Conduct a survey on current E-Records activities across jurisdictions: Develop survey instrument and administer

6 General Observations Findings: 9 of 12 jurisdictions already have, or are planning an EDRM implementation within the next 3 years. 3 of those 9 jurisdictions have no EDRM solution currently, but plan to implement one in the next 3 years. 6 of the 9 jurisdictions with existing, or planned, EDRM solutions are taking a centrally coordinated / managed approach to implementation. Opportunities: Timing is right to influence consistent solution selection configuration and implementation. Opportunity to leverage best practices of jurisdictions with EDRM experience. This implementation approach suggests general support for government-wide, standardized practices and holistic solutions. 6

6 of the 9 jurisdictions with existing, or planned, EDRM solutions are taking a centrally coordinated / managed approach to implementation.

7 General Observations Findings: 5 of 9 jurisdictions reported a maturity level below 2. Opportunities: Potential to collaborate on best practices to accelerate progress. Incomplete (Level 0) - EDRM processes are either not performed or are partially performed. Performed (Level 1) - EDRM processes are performed but are not institutionalized. Managed (Level 2) - EDRM processes are performed and have the basic infrastructure in place to support the processes. Defined (Level 3) - EDRM processes are defined and tailored from the government's set of standard processes according to the government's tailoring guidelines. Quantitatively Managed (Level 4) - EDRM processes are controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques. Optimizing (Level 5) - EDRM processes are quantitatively managed and are improved based on an understanding of the common causes of variation inherent in the process. * See Annex-A for further information regarding maturity levels 7

Managed (Level 2) - EDRM processes are performed and have the basic infrastructure in place to support the processes.

8 General Observations Findings: Several different standards, guidelines, and best practices are used by jurisdictions in planning and implementing EDRM solutions. 7 of 9 jurisdictions either have, or will, establish / procure a single standardized product as part of their approach to EDRM implementation. The most common requirements of EDRM solutions are Electronic Document and Records Management, Workflow Management, and Long-term Preservation. Opportunities: Potential to collaborate on development and use of pan- Canadian guidelines; crossjurisdictional standards; and best practices related to these common functions. Could have wide applicability and interest, and potentially offer resource savings. 8

The most common requirements of EDRM solutions are Electronic Document and Records Management, Workflow Management, and Long-term Preservation.

9 General Observations Open Text SharePoint 2010 Open Text edocs 5.2 (DM & RM) & ECM 10 (Document & Record Management) TBD 6 jurisdictions planning to implement EDRM solutions, or implement changes to existing EDRM solutions, have identified the following products for potential use. Open Text HP TRIM (Total Records and Information Management) HP TRIM 6.0 (and over time, possible integration with SharePoint 2010) 3 additional jurisdictions with existing EDRM solutions identified the following products in use. 9

to existing EDRM solutions, have identified the following products for potential use.

10 Challenges The diversity of products used by jurisdictions increases the challenge of collaborating. More than half of jurisdictions reported a maturity level below 2 indicating that EDRM is not yet institutionalized. This could initially limit collaboration efforts to areas requiring less EDRM maturity. 10

More than half of jurisdictions reported a maturity level below 2 indicating

11 Collaboration Opportunities Given product diversity, E-Records collaboration initiatives should include product-independent policies, directives, standards, guidelines implementation plans and best practices, for example: EDRM Readiness Assessment and Preparation Standards and Specifications Configuration Metadata for Recordkeeping and Resource Discovery Function-Based Classification Common Taxonomies Create a mechanism and process for gathering best practices from within, and external to, PSCIOC (especially related to Electronic Document and Records Management, Workflow, and Preservation). Explore barriers to increased take-up and usage rates and collaborate on solutions including training and awareness campaigns. 11

Discovery Function-Based Classification Common Taxonomies Create a mechanism and process for gathering best practices from within, and external to, PSCIOC (especially related to

12 Next Steps IM Sub-Committee to explore identified Opportunities for Collaboration on EDRM implementation and identify specific initiatives. Propose EDRM collaboration initiatives at the next PSCIOC meeting. 12

implementation and identify specific initiatives.

13 Annex A Maturity Model Incomplete (Level 0) - EDRM processes are either not performed or are partially performed. Performed (Level 1) - EDRM processes are performed but are not institutionalized. They are usually ad hoc and success depends on the competence and heroics of the people in the government and not on the use of proven processes. In spite of this, the government provides services that often work, but they frequently exceed the budget and schedule documented in its plans. Managed (Level 2) - EDRM processes are performed and have the basic infrastructure in place to support the processes. Electronic document and records management is planned and executed in accordance with policy; employs skilled people who have adequate resources to produce controlled outputs; involves relevant stakeholders; is monitored, controlled, and reviewed; and is evaluated for adherence to its process description. Defined (Level 3) - EDRM processes are defined and tailored from the government's set of standard processes according to the government's tailoring guidelines. EDRM processes are managed more proactively using an understanding of the interrelationships of the process activities and detailed measures of the process and its work products. Quantitatively Managed (Level 4) - EDRM processes are controlled using statistical and other quantitative techniques. Quantitative objectives for quality and process performance are established and used as criteria in managing the process. Quality and process performance is understood in statistical terms and is managed throughout the life of the process. Optimizing (Level 5) - EDRM processes are quantitatively managed and are improved based on an understanding of the common causes of variation inherent in the process. The focus of an optimizing process is on continually improving the range of process performance through both incremental and innovative improvements. 13

In spite of this, the government provides services that often work, but they frequently exceed the budget and schedule documented in its plans.

Universiteit Leiden. ICT in Business. Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS) Capability Maturity Model for Software Usage

Universiteit Leiden. ICT in Business. Leiden Institute of Advanced Computer Science (LIACS) Capability Maturity Model for Software Usage Universiteit Leiden ICT in Business Capability Maturity Model for Software Usage Name: Yunwei Huang Student-no: s1101005 Date: 16/06/2014 1st supervisor: Dr. Luuk Groenewegen 2nd supervisor: Dr. Nelleke