Objectives of IG

Filed under: Assets,Objectives,Outcomes,People,Process,Risk,Strategy,Time — lenand @ 11:41 am
Tags: , , ,

Information Governance is the setting of Objectives to achieve measurable Outcomes by People using information Assets in a life cycle Process that considers the impact of both Risk and Time.

That’s the one line definition that needs some expansion.  We have to start at at the beginning and decide why we need Information Governance (IG) in the first place.  That is the Objectives of IG.

Quarkside says that the primary objective of Information Governance is to use information, not to prevent its proper use.   Information, from any data source, represents the added value of some data processing activity.  Locking data away, without the ability to use it, only costs money; and may lose the opportunity for delivering additional benefits.

Having said that, information assets need to be held securely and lawfully with access provided to authorised people. In a public library, librarians acquire books, catalogue them and provide access as custodians of the collection.  The librarians have added value when citizens search the catalogue and make use of the service.  Citizens have their own Objectives about why they need to select a book. They obtain access to information Assets within the library governance structure.

Objectives are one of the primary dimensions of the 7 Dimensional Information Governance Framework (7DIG).  The seven primary dimensions (Objectives, Outcomes, People, Assets, Process, Risk and Time) are intended to be MECE (Mutually Exclusive and Collectively Exhaustive).  A typical list of secondary dimensions may not be MECE, being dependent on the context and priorities of any specific IG framework.  For example, seven candidate secondary dimensions of Objectives could be:

  • Policy: direction from political leaders in a business area, providing the vision for maximising the value of information held;
  • Strategy: medium term initiatives and programmes leading to information sharing;
  • Law: over-riding principles, regulations and statutes that must be obeyed; the Data Protection Act, the Freedom of Information Act and lots more;
  • Constraints: local conditions, culture and practice that control Information Assurance (IA) and information sharing protocols;
  • Scope: range of business area and organisational functions impacted by the IG Process;
  • Context: external organisations and conditions interacting with the local IG regime;
  • Specifications: definition of things that need to be done, capable of measurement and quality assurance.

Secondary dimensions are just things to think about when establishing an IG Policy, Strategy and Framework. They should not become part of a tick box culture.   Corporate management needs to buy into them at the highest level.

The 7DIG Framework should focus on Outcomes and the value of using information, not purely the protection of information by an IA process. The next blog in the series will illustrate the importance of early consideration of the Outcomes desired by an organisation or partnership.



  1. […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Leonard Anderson, Leonard Anderson. Leonard Anderson said: Objectives of IG. Part 1 of the #7DIG Framwork. Dull prose. http://wp.me/p14MGf-hC […]

    Pingback by Tweets that mention Objectives of IG « Quarkside -- Topsy.com — 08/02/2011 @ 12:27 pm | Reply

  2. […] with good governance, should be comparable to the Objectives. The previous IG blog listed seven candidate secondary dimensions for […]

    Pingback by IG Outcomes: Focus on Benefits « Quarkside — 02/03/2011 @ 9:13 am | Reply

  3. […] Objectives […]

    Pingback by Information Governance defined? « Quarkside — 02/03/2011 @ 9:42 am | Reply

  4. […] Governance (IG) must have Process. The Process must consider IG Objectives, Outcomes, People and Assets.  Theses are the critical first five dimensions of the Seven […]

    Pingback by IG Process: Due Diligence « Quarkside — 02/03/2011 @ 9:50 am | Reply

  5. […] 7DIG Time dimension applies to all the other six dimensions of the 7DIG framework ie Objectives, Assets, People, Outcomes, Process and Risk.  Every single sub-dimension can have the question […]

    Pingback by IG Time: the spatio-temporal paradigm « Quarkside — 01/12/2011 @ 11:35 am | Reply

  6. […] It brings together the People who have to do the information governance with the Process that sets Objectives and uses Assets to achieve the desired Outcomes.  And it has a Risk […]

    Pingback by 7DIG: Time needs more than philosophy « Quarkside — 12/02/2012 @ 10:09 am | Reply

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Blog at WordPress.com.

%d bloggers like this: