Digital diplomatics and measurement of electronic public data qualities

Digital diplomatics and measurement of electronic public data qualities Purpose – This paper aims to present a recent study on the definition and measurement of quality dimensions of public electronic records and archives (QADEPs: Qualités des archives et documents électroniques publics). It develops an original model and a complete method with tools to define and measure electronic public data qualities within public institutions. It highlights also the relationship between diplomatics principles and the measurement of trustworthiness of electronic data in particular. This paper presents a general overview of the main results of this study, with also illustrative examples to demonstrate the feasibility of measuring the qualities of electronic archives in the context of public institutions. Design/methodology/approach – This research was conducted in two phases. The first one was the conceptual phase in which the quality dimensions were identified and defined with specific sets of indicators and variables. The second phase was the empirical phase which involved the testing of the model on real electronic documents belonging to several public institutions to validate its relevance and applicability. These tests were performed at the Archives of the State of Wallis and the Archives of the State of Geneva, thanks to different measurement tools designed especially for this stage of the research. Findings – The QADEPs model analyzes the qualities of electronic records in public institutions through three dimensions: trustworthiness, exploitability and representativeness. These dimensions were divided into eight sub-dimensions comprising 17 indicators for a total of 46 variables. These dimensions and their variables tried to cover the main aspects of quality standards for electronic data and public documents. The study demonstrates that nearly 60 per cent of the measured variables could be automated. Research limitations/implications – The QADEPs model was defined and tested in a Swiss context on a limited sample of electronic public data to validate, essentially, its feasibility. It would be useful to extend this approach and test it on a broader sample in different contexts abroad. Practical implications – The decisionmaking of records retention in organizations and public institutions in particular is difficult to establish and justify because it is based generally on subjective and non-defendable practices. The QADEPs model offers specific metrics with their related measuring tools to evaluate and identify what is valuable and what is eliminable within the whole set of institutional electronic information. The model should reinforce the information governance of those institutions and help them control the risks related to information management. Originality/value – The current practice of archival appraisal does not yet invest in a meticulous examination of the nature of documents that should be preserved permanently. The lack of studies on the definition and measurement of the qualities of electronic and public electronic records prevents verification as to whether archival materials are significant. This paper fills in some of the gaps. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Records Management Journal Emerald Publishing

Digital diplomatics and measurement of electronic public data qualities

Records Management Journal, Volume 25 (1): 22 – Mar 16, 2015

Loading next page...
 
/lp/emerald-publishing/digital-diplomatics-and-measurement-of-electronic-public-data-BvFfDRWHwb
Publisher
Emerald Publishing
Copyright
Copyright © Emerald Group Publishing Limited
ISSN
0956-5698
DOI
10.1108/RMJ-01-2015-0006
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Purpose – This paper aims to present a recent study on the definition and measurement of quality dimensions of public electronic records and archives (QADEPs: Qualités des archives et documents électroniques publics). It develops an original model and a complete method with tools to define and measure electronic public data qualities within public institutions. It highlights also the relationship between diplomatics principles and the measurement of trustworthiness of electronic data in particular. This paper presents a general overview of the main results of this study, with also illustrative examples to demonstrate the feasibility of measuring the qualities of electronic archives in the context of public institutions. Design/methodology/approach – This research was conducted in two phases. The first one was the conceptual phase in which the quality dimensions were identified and defined with specific sets of indicators and variables. The second phase was the empirical phase which involved the testing of the model on real electronic documents belonging to several public institutions to validate its relevance and applicability. These tests were performed at the Archives of the State of Wallis and the Archives of the State of Geneva, thanks to different measurement tools designed especially for this stage of the research. Findings – The QADEPs model analyzes the qualities of electronic records in public institutions through three dimensions: trustworthiness, exploitability and representativeness. These dimensions were divided into eight sub-dimensions comprising 17 indicators for a total of 46 variables. These dimensions and their variables tried to cover the main aspects of quality standards for electronic data and public documents. The study demonstrates that nearly 60 per cent of the measured variables could be automated. Research limitations/implications – The QADEPs model was defined and tested in a Swiss context on a limited sample of electronic public data to validate, essentially, its feasibility. It would be useful to extend this approach and test it on a broader sample in different contexts abroad. Practical implications – The decisionmaking of records retention in organizations and public institutions in particular is difficult to establish and justify because it is based generally on subjective and non-defendable practices. The QADEPs model offers specific metrics with their related measuring tools to evaluate and identify what is valuable and what is eliminable within the whole set of institutional electronic information. The model should reinforce the information governance of those institutions and help them control the risks related to information management. Originality/value – The current practice of archival appraisal does not yet invest in a meticulous examination of the nature of documents that should be preserved permanently. The lack of studies on the definition and measurement of the qualities of electronic and public electronic records prevents verification as to whether archival materials are significant. This paper fills in some of the gaps.

Journal

Records Management JournalEmerald Publishing

Published: Mar 16, 2015

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create folders to
organize your research

Export folders, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off