Transparency and Accountability in Content Information Governance
Unstructured and semi-structured content assets have value. One way or another there is a cost involved in the creation and lifecycle management of these assets. There is also value in the ability to sell and barter some of these assets (i.e. intellectual property), to increase competitive advantages, or to increase sales. Managing these assets are typically looked at as a by-product of business not as an asset that contributes to the value of the organization.
One of the words I have always found interesting as an indicator of the value of content assets is transparency. We have a very large government client and they use the word transparency quite a bit. According to Wikipedia, transparency is operating in such a way that it is easy for others to see what actions are performed. One of the other terms used in the definition is accountability and is an integral component of transparency.
I’m really not going around in a tangent here. To get to the point, architecting an information governance plan or an enterprise metadata repository transparency and accountability are required to provide the evidence of the value of the asset. The result must answer two questions. Can we trust the data? Can we use the data to make investments or sell assets? If both answers aren’t yes perhaps the time has come to revise how you are viewing your content – as a business asset or as a byproduct of business?