Information Week as published its latest report on the state of the Cloud. The infographic below provides the main highlights of the report:
In this article, David Rabb discusses the various privacy implications of the monetization of data. Rabb focuses specifically on Personally Identifiable Information (PII) that companies can obtain about people through cookies, IP addresses, GPS, and so forth. Companies have often touted the anonymity of cookies but, as Rabb points out, there are many ways to tie cookies to known individuals, a process that often includes “consent” consumers don’t know they’ve granted. Other theoretically anonymous identifiers such as device IDs and IP addresses can also often be connected to PII. And research has shown that even less specific information, such as a collection of taxi trips or a combination of birthdate [sic] and Zip code, are [sic] often enough to identify specific individuals.
I don’t think that most internet users are naive enough to think that companies don’t have their PII but, as Rabb points out, customers may broadly assume your company knows everything about them but they can still be surprised at the data presented in specific situations – especially if that data is wrong.
Information managers face the increasingly complex task of maintaining the security of PII, ensuring this information is accurate, using only the personal information needed for a specific task, and ensuring that the privacy rights of customers are respected.
A research study from York University, one of my almae matres, studied text messages sent between nurses and physicians in deteriorating internal medicine patients requiring escalation to intensive care unit (ICU) to identify issues in failures to rescue. Looking at records from 2012 to 2014 at the Toronto General Hospital, the team found that message quality was positively linked to survival. The study highlights the need for a standardized and responsive text-based communication system.
As a taxonomist and cataloguer, I’m pleased to see a degree of authority control (or standardized vocabulary) used in these text messages, as shown in this legend of abbreviations:
RR = respiratory rate; NP = nasal prongs; bpm = beats per minute; BP = blood pressure; pt = patient; NS = normal saline; TM = tracheostomy mask; A&O = alert and oriented; ABG = arterial blood gas; CCRT = critical care response team (rapid response team).
I’m interested also in whether hospitals have a plan for managing these records. I consider these records to have business value, since they document decisions made, and transmit patient information. Are these text messages subjected to any records and information management policies and standards? Are they subject to retention schedules? Given the potential confidential nature of the content of these messages, how is their security maintained? Are personnel using mobile devices that are owned by the hospital and protected by firewalls? There is certainly a lot of ground to explore here. I think a discussion with the authors might be interesting.
The government of Australia has been a significant leader in the field of information management for several years, and serves as the standard I use in my RIM classes to demonstrate IM best practices. Continuing this fine tradition, the National Archives of Australia has just published a new Australian Government standard to manage business information.
The new Information Management Standard (IMS) outlines principles to help agencies meet business, government and community needs in relation to how information is managed across the sector and aims to help them maximise the business benefits of well-managed information in the Australian Government.
The eight principles are:
Principle 1: Business information is systematically governed
Principle 2: Necessary business information is created
Principle 3: Business information is adequately described
Principle 4: Business information is suitably stored and preserved
Principle 5: How long business information should be kept is known
Principle 6: Business information is accountably destroyed or transferred
Principle 7: Business information is saved in systems where it can be appropriately managed
Principle 8: Business information is available for use and reuse.
This standard complements the National Archives’ Digital Continuity 2020 plan.
I am pleased to announce that I have signed a contract for another book. Below you will find a call for chapter proposals. Please consider submitting a proposal, and feel free to circulate this call to your colleagues:
Call for book chapter proposals
Book title: Social tagging for linked data across environments
Dr. Louise Spiteri. Associate professor, School of Information Management, Dalhousie University.
Dr. Diane Rasmussen Pennington. Lecturer, Department of Computer and Information Sciences, University of Strathclyde.
This book will explore how social tags can serve to link content across a variety of environments. Most studies of social tagging have tended to focus on discrete applications, e.g., library catalogues, blogs, social bookmarking sites, and so forth. Hashtags, in particular, can provide this level of linked data. Since hashtags are now used across different platforms (e.g., Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, WordPress, Instagram), it would be interesting to explore the role of hashtags as a form of linked data without the complex implementation of RDF and other Semantic Web technologies; for example, a hashtag on a specific topic such as #PublicLibrariesInScotland could link to a conference on this topic, the research done by academics in the field, blogs from practitioners, newspaper articles, and so forth.
This book will explore social tagging behaviour. Most studies of this topic have focused on the types of tags that people assign to resources. Our interest is to examine how people interact with, and use, social tags to access and create resources and networks in linked environments.
It should be noted that, for the context of this book, the term “social tags” is used to include hashtags and geotags.
We welcome book chapter contributions centred (but not exclusively) on the following themes:
Intended readers include practicing library and information professionals who implement electronic access to collections such as cataloguers and systems developers. Information architects and web developers would also have a particular interest in the book, as well as students in information management and cognate disciplines.
Chapter proposal submissions are invited from researchers and practitioners. Proposals should be limited 1000 words, explaining the mission and concerns of the chapter and how it fits into the general theme of the book. Please submit proposals to Louise.Spiteri@dal.ca by June 30, 2017.
Chapter proposals: Submission deadline: June 30, 2017
Review proposals & contact authors: By July 31, 2017
Chapters due: By September 30, 2017
BReview of chapters: By December 31, 2017
Editing of chapters after review: By February 28, 2018
Submission of first draft to Facet: By March 31, 2018
Review of proofs & creation of index: By April 30, 2018
In this article, Andrew Horne, IT practice leader at CEB, discusses the changing role of the Chief Information Officer (CIO). Horne argues that while the importance of managing digital data is increasing, the recognition of this importance could lead to the decline of the CIO position, as this management becomes more integrated throughout various management levels, rather than the purview of one individual. Horne suggests that CIOs can explore different paths in this changing landscape:
Although I find the terms above a little cringe-worthy perhaps, given my dislike of jargon and buzzwords, Horne does point to the importance of flexibility in the area of data management, especially as more functions become automated. The ability to adapt quickly to new environments is certainly something that information management programs need to incorporate into their curricula.
Defining the principles of information management has never been easy; those of us in the field know what we do, and appreciate the value of our knowledge, but defining what we do to people outside our field can be challenging. This lack of clarity is not a reflection of any weakness in the area of information management but, rather, a reflection of the breadth of its scope and relevance. In this article, James Robertson outlines the key features of information management, which he draws from a number of “critical success factors” from various information management programs. Robertson makes a point of emphasizing that information management is not about just information technology; those of us in the field understand the frustration of having all our skill sets subsumed under the umbrella of technology: From the outset, it must be emphasised that this is not an article about technology. Rather, it is about the organisational, cultural and strategic factors that must be considered to improve the management of information within organisations.
Robertson’s 10 principles of information management:
Robertson does an excellent job of explaining the scope and breadth of information management, and I will be sure to incorporate this article in my courses.