Skip to main content

Meetings: Data Governance and Information Security

This week saw a meeting of the University’s Data Governance Group.  I gave a presentation about enterprise architecture, including my draft principles for data architecture and the need for governance of the data architecture as it evolves.

I requested that we produce a list of core data sets, with the data steward identified for each, and a standard process for requesting and recording access to data.  Some of our data stewards already have reasonably mature processes in place, but others do not and the lack of standardisation makes it difficult for people to access the data they need.

We had a useful discussion about this and other issues. One key piece of feedback I took away was that my draft principles are focussed on centrally managed datasets, and I also need to consider how locally managed data fits into the architecture. The view of the group is that we need to ensure that this data can be managed without undue overhead.  I think the tools we develop for documenting central data sets will also be useful for local data stewards, should they choose to use them, but we may require a level of governance for central data that would be optional for at least some local data. 

I'm reminded of the "big blue ring" diagram that Nikki Rogers used to such good effect at the University of Bristol.  I may well recast our informal high-level architecture diagram in a similar way.  The following is the Bristol version:

blogbluering

The next meeting of the Data Governance Group will look into how the group should engage with various operational processes to better oversee the governance of data within the university.  This should be a very interesting discussion.

I also had a meeting with our new Chief Information Security Officer, Alistair Fenemore.  As Alistair has been in post for only a couple of weeks, this was very much an introductory meeting to explore our concerns and see where they overlapped.   We agreed to meet regularly in order to coordinate our efforts and I look forward to working with Alistair.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Changing Principles

In EA, architecture principles set a framework for making architectural decisions.  They help to establish a common understanding across different groups of stakeholders, and provide guidance for portfolios and projects.  Michael Durso of the LSE gave a good introduction to the idea in a webinar last week for the UCISA EA community.

Many organisations take the TOGAF architecture principles as a starting point.  These are based on the four architectural domains of TOGAF: business, information/data, applications, technology/infrastructure.  These principles tend to describe what should be done, e.g. re-use applications, buy in software rather than build it, keep data secure.  See for example the principles adopted at Plymouth University and the University of Birmingham.

Recently though, I encountered a different way of looking at principles.  The user experience design community tend to focus more on how we should do things.  E.g. we should start with user needs, use iterative developm…

Why the UCISA Capability Model is useful

What do Universities do?

This may seem a strange question to ask and the answer may seem obvious.  Universities educate students and undertake research.  And perhaps they work with industrial partners and create spin-off companies of their worn.  And they may work with local communities, and affiliation bodies for certain degress, and they definitely report on their activities to government bodies such as HEFCE.  They provide student services and support.  The longeryou think about it, the more things you can think of that a University does.

In business, the things that an organisation does are called "capabilities", which is a slightly strange term.  I think it is linked to the HR idea of a combination of the CAPacity and ABILITY to do a task.  Whatever the name, it is a useful concept.  A capability is more basic than a process: a University may change the way it educates students but as long as it remains a University it will educate them one way or another.

A capability …

"No more us & them"

WonkHE recently posted an interesting opinion piece with the title Academics and Administrators: No more ‘us and them’. In that post, Paul Greatrix rebutted criticisms of professional services (administrative) staff in Universites from some academics. To illustrate his point, he quoted recent articles in which administrators were portrayed as a useless overhead on the key tasks at hand (teaching and research).

This flows both ways, as Greatrix himself points out. As Enterprise Architect, I work with Professional Services colleagues and I have heard some of them express opinions that clearly fail to understand the nature of academic work. Academics cannot be treated as if they were factory workers, churning out lectures on a treadmill.

I think these comments reveal a fundamental clash of ideas about how a University should work. Some people who come into management positions for other sectors tend to frame the University as a business, with students and research funders as customers t…