Annual Report: 2002-2003

CHAPTER II:
ADDRESSING THE CRISIS IN INFORMATION MANAGEMENT

Interest in and attention to information management have increased considerably following the recommendations in the Information Commissioner's 2000-2001 Report (and in the government's own Situation Analysis report in 2000).ⁱⁱⁱCentral agencies and an increasing number of departments are responding to the calls for action:

Information management is becoming more widely recognized as a core discipline of public sector management.

In government workshops and public presentations, the National Archivist, the Chief Information Officer and other senior government officials have been working to raise awareness of the value of records and information management. Treasury Board Secretariat now sponsors an annual fall "IM Day" for public service managers. Presentations and case studies underline the importance of IM. In February, the Library and Archives of Canada sponsored a symposium for 245 senior government staff on "Achieving Excellence in Information Management". The objectives were to engage senior managers, recognize IM achievements and strengthen the government's IM community. More than 80% of senior executives who attended left the symposium committing to support stronger IM programs in their departments.

Aside from the reports of the Information Commissioner, the Auditor General and Treasury Board itself, other studies have focused on information management. A review of the government's ATIP regime echoed the Information Commissioner's call for a stronger access culture and the need for better training, tools, awareness, leadership and incentives for documenting government activities and managing government records.^iv

New materials have appeared that provide a potent business case for improving information management. The Library and Archives of Canada prepared and widely disseminated a Case for Action for Improving Information Management in the Government of Canada.^v The Case for Action defines IM, its benefits, the risks of inaction and describes how the Government of Canada is lagging behind other governments and the private sector in improving information management. As well, a recent discussion paper published by the Public Policy Forum discusses in detail the intimate relationship between good recordkeeping and good governance.^vi

As Government On-Line matures as an electronic service delivery strategy, more attention is being paid to the quality and relevance of program information, not just the speed and convenience of internet-based access.

Numerous conferences and workshops for government staff are focusing on the business value of information management and knowledge management. "IM" and "KM" are becoming both trendy catchwords as well as serious disciplines that impact on every aspect of public (and private) sector activity.

All of these activities are raising the profile of information management and helping to generate greater interest in improving it in the Government of Canada. Information is becoming recognized as one of the four primary assets that government depends on and must manage in an effective and professional manner (the other resources being money, people and technology).

There is a better understanding of what information management is.

The definition and level of understanding of what comprises information management vary widely. "IM" encompasses a variety of processes and practices related to records management, data management, web content management, access and privacy administration, knowledge management and others. There is, however, a more widely shared understanding of IM than before. A new Management of Government Information (MGI) policy makes clear what managers and other public servants must do to manage different forms of information in their care. The Library and Archives of Canada's Case for Action defines the fundamental information management activities and processes. Treasury Board Secretariat's new Framework for the Management of Information describes the wide range of elements and activities that constitute IM. These and other initiatives to describe and discuss information management have provided more clarity and stimulated greater awareness of information management and about what needs to be done to better manage government records and data in electronic, paper and other forms.

There is stronger leadership for information management.

At both the central agency and departmental levels, stronger leadership for information management is emerging. Within Treasury Board Secretariat, the Chief Information Officer Branch is creating a stronger focus on IM and linking IM more closely with its Government On-Line priorities. At the operational level, the Library and Archives of Canada is emerging as the centre of expertise and lead agency for the life-cycle management of government records and documents. Both agencies have a number of IM initiatives underway and senior IM staff have shown themselves to be energetic in leading change.

Two "champions" for information management have been designated to promote IM across the government: the National Archivist and the Associate Deputy Minister of National Defence. Together, they combine the perspectives and expertise of an important information management professional with that of a highly respected government business manager.

At the departmental level, a clearer focus for IM leadership is also emerging, albeit slowly. The IM responsibilities of chief information officers (and other senior executives) are becoming more apparent and more integrated with their business and technology-related functions. The new Management of Government Information policy specifically requires that a senior executive in each department be designated with overall responsibility for implementing the policy. Deputy ministers themselves are increasingly expected to actively support and provide resources for IM development. This expectation comes both from central agencies as well as from their own managers looking for leadership. To promote better governance and accountability for IM, the Chief Information Officer Branch has drafted detailed guidelines in these areas for departments (see page 11, "Policies and Tools").

The Government of Canada is also demonstrating leadership in information management internationally. The Library and Archives of Canada, Public Works and Government Services Canada and the Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) are involved in initiatives to share Canadian expertise in IM with developing countries. These activities reflect a strong Canadian role in the G8 nations efforts to implement the Okinawa Charter on Global Information Society. ^vii

There is greater collaboration among central agencies and departments.

A tradition of top-down policy and program development has long existed in the federal bureaucracy. While change is inconsistent, a more collaborative approach is becoming more prevalent. The Framework for Managing Information, the Management of Government Information policy and the Information Management Capacity Check tool (discussed later) are the products of significant consultation among central agencies and line departments. As well, the IM roles of the two most prominent agencies (the Chief Information Officer Branch of Treasury Board Secretariat and the Library and Archives of Canada) are becoming clearer, more coherent and better coordinated. There is an understanding that the development of most operational policies, practices and tools for records and information management will be undertaken through interdepartmental teams with central agency leadership.

The joining of the National Archives and National Library to form the Library and Archives of Canada also provides an important opportunity to strengthen the institution's IM leadership role by integrating library, archival and document management perspectives and breaking down professional and other barriers.

There are new mechanisms for addressing IM issues and developing shared solutions.

New governance structures and mechanisms are enabling IM issues to be more readily discussed and addressed. These include an Information Management and Policies Committee (IMPC) of Treasury Board, consisting of director generals in departments and central agencies and co-chaired by the Chief Information Officer Branch and Health Canada. IMPC is a subcommittee of the Service, Information and Technology Management Board (SIMB). IM proposals discussed and endorsed at these levels flow to Treasury Board's existing Information Management Sub-Committee (TIMS), consisting of the Chief Information Officer of Canada and a number of deputy ministers. And although confusingly named, an Information Management Champions Committee (IMCC) provides a forum specifically for human resources development issues. Other advisory and "sounding board" bodies are the Information Management Advisory Group (IMAG) and the Chief Information Officer Council. All of these bodies bring needed process, collaboration and governance to information management matters. At TIMS, in particular, there is now both greater opportunity and need to consider the IM dimensions of major government programs. These committees are complimented by other bodies such as the Information Management Forum, the Records Management Institute and the Council on Federal Libraries.

There are new policies and tools to support information management.

A strong policy foundation for the government's IM program has now been developed. The Management of Government Information policy was approved by Treasury Board in April 2003. MGI succinctly defines the life-cycle operational requirements for managing information in all forms. It provides information about the legal framework for recordkeeping, requires that departments ensure effective IM governance and accountability arrangements, and necessitates ongoing evaluation of IM activities. Unlike earlier policies, MGI speaks to all managers and identifies the value of well-managed information to the government and to Canadians.^viii

MGI is at the centre of Treasury Board Secretariat's Framework for Managing Information (FMI). The Framework maps the elements of the government's IM infrastructure (laws, policies, standards, guidelines, etc.) and shows their interrelationships. While some of the elements of the infrastructure are already in place within the government, others still need to be developed or adapted. Over time, the web-based Framework will provide links to all of these materials.

One of these elements is a guideline for departments for establishing strong governance and accountability arrangements for IM.^ix Still in draft form, this document defines governance and accountability and related processes. It describes in detail the IM roles and responsibilities of ministers, deputy ministers, the senior executive responsible for IM and other managers and staff (including information management and information technology specialists).

It is a blueprint for establishing effective leadership and accountability for IM within federal institutions. When released, it will substantially respond to the Information Commissioner's call for a strong information-centred accountability framework.

A newly developed tool and methodology helps departments measure their current capacity for managing information. The Library and Archives of Canada's Information Management Capacity Check (IMCC) identifies six aspects of information management (including management of the records life cycle) and for each describes the characteristics of five "maturity levels" ranging from "Non-existent/Undeveloped" to "Industry Best Practices".^x Consistent with the International Records Management Standard^xi (ISO 15489), the Capacity Check provides a basis for departments to establish a baseline and determine IM development priorities. The intention is eventually to link each area assessed to a suite of practical tools (model standards, policies, guidelines and practices) that departments may use. The government has endorsed the IMCC for use by all departments.

A number of other central IM initiatives are underway. Led by either the Library and Archives of Canada, the CIO Branch or undertaken collaboratively, they include:

• development of a web-based Records and Information Life-Cycle Management Guidedescribing IM processes and resources for managers as well as a guide for deputy ministers;
• development of government-wide retention periods for common administrative records in departments;
• updating of "Records Disposition Authorities" that allow departments to dispose of their records when no longer needed;
• special projects to dispose of unneeded departmental paper records ("Clearing Paper Mountains");
• development of a government-wide file classification model and implementation guide for common business functions;
• work on a strategy for preserving archival electronic records;
• review of the federal records centres program;
• implementation of a government-wide metadata standard (a model for describing records and data holdings) and a related thesaurus of common terms;
• development of specific guidelines for the management of e-mail records, web documents and encrypted and digitally signed documents;
• development of new guidelines for the management of government publications.

Individual departments are improving their IM programs.

Individual departments are taking steps to improve records and information management. With the necessity to implement the new Management of Government Information policy in mind, a number of departments are reviewing their IM infrastructure, raising internal awareness, and introducing departmental policies, standards and processes.^xii

More departments are implementing electronic records and document management systems such as RDIMS, although cost and complexity remain barriers. Departments that have already implemented RDIMS are realizing that their success depends as much on changes in the business culture (e.g. the willingness to document key activities) as it does on learning to use the new software. As well, RDIMS requires a high and continuing level of training and support to become an accepted way of managing records and documents at the desktop.

At the Library and Archives of Canada's IM symposium in February, ten departments were singled out for significant information management projects. "Leading by Example Awards" were given to the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade, Public Works and Government Services Canada, Transport Canada, Solicitor General of Canada, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, Human Resources Development Canada, Statistics Canada, Canadian International Development Agency, Health Canada and Natural Resources Canada. Examples of initiatives include: "clearing paper mountains", evaluating their IM capacity, developing virtual libraries, introducing department-wide file plans and introducing e-mail management tools.

Overall, progress "on the ground" is still modest and varies widely depending on the degree of senior management support and the level of resources made available. (At the IM symposium, managers agreed that strong IM leadership from their deputy ministers was among the most crucial factors for moving ahead.)

There are promising efforts to improve IM skills and develop a new IM community.

The e-government information environment requires a new breed of information professionals. A common complaint of deputy ministers and other senior managers is that people who understand and can support this new environment are not available. Records managers, file clerks and other traditional positions common in the paper world have long been disappearing. Reasons include budget cuts and the naïve assumption that new technology would make "records management" unnecessary. Managers subsequently realized that managing complex electronic records and data systems was an even more challenging task than dealing with "paper mountains".

As attention shifts from technology management to information management (and eventually, it is hoped, to knowledge management), departments are beginning to appreciate the need for professionals who understand the management requirements of both "data" and "records" in multiple media. Such staff are essential for designing and implementing a mature information systems environment and helping to embed effective recordkeeping and other IM practices in business processes and technology tools. As an example, public service values and codes should include a commitment to documenting government decisions and actions.

There is strong evidence that central agencies are helping generate a new IM "community of practice". The Organizational Readiness Office (ORO) in the Chief Information Officer Branch is leading this change management process. Based on earlier work to identify IM core competencies, it has placed a repository of IM work descriptions on the federal intranet that can be used by departments to develop or revise IM positions. In general, these represent more sophisticated and better paid positions than traditional records management jobs. In particular, ORO is establishing models for three director-level "signature" positions that departments should have. These positions relate to information management, knowledge management and access/privacy management. ORO has proposed a two-year "IM Leadership" development program for director-level managers. As noted earlier, the CIO Branch has also drafted governance and accountability guidelines for departments that describe IM roles and responsibilities of managers and staff.

Much of this activity is community-driven: IT staff, records specialists, librarians and program managers recognize that issues, perspectives and skills are converging as e-government emerges. Professional islands are beginning to disappear. "Web content managers" are an example of a new position that should require knowledge of government programs, document management and preservation, and new technology.

Consideration is also being given to the education and training programs needed to develop this new group of IM managers and staff. The Knowledge Institute in Public Works and Government Services Canada is considering the role it can play in training supervisors and other middle managers. It has offered some valuable IM training in the past (e.g., "IM: Its Role in Government On-Line"). There is also potential for the Canadian Centre for Management Development to develop programs that deal directly with the information management dimension for senior executives. These prospects and plans are still at an early stage, however.

As IM professions and their development strategies slowly converge, an increasing number of consultations, training and development events is being offered to government managers and information management staff by a variety of public and non-government organizations.

As they proceed, these efforts will show that information management is a core discipline in the public service. Managing information is what everyone does.