The Electronic Journal of Information Systems Evaluation provides critical perspectives on topics relevant to Information Systems Evaluation, with an emphasis on the organisational and management implications
For general enquiries email
Click here to see other Scholarly Electronic Journals published by API
For a range of research text books on this and complimentary topics visit the Academic Bookshop

Information about the European Conference on Information Management and Evaluation is available here





Journal Article

Reconstructing the Past for Organizational Accountability  pp127-137

Geert-Jan van Bussel

© Jan 2012 Volume 15 Issue 1, ECIME 2011, Editor: Walter Castelnovo and Elena Ferrari, pp1 - 148

Look inside Download PDF (free)


Many organizations have undergone substantial reorganization in the last decade. They re‑engineered their business processes and exchanged proprietary, not integrated applications for more standard solutions. Integration of structured data in relational d atabases has improved documentation of business transactions and increased data quality. But almost 90% of the information that organizations manage is unstructured, cannot easily be integrated into a traditional database. When used for organizational act ions and transactions, structured and unstructured information are records. They are meant and used as evidence. Governments, courts and other stakeholders are making increasing demands for the trustworthiness of records. An analysis of literature of the information, organization and archival sciences illustrates that accountability needs the reconstruction of the past. Hypothesis of this paper is that for the reconstruction of the past each organization needs a combination of three mechanisms: enterprise records management, organizational memory and records auditing. Enterprise records management ensures that records meet the quality requirements needed for accountability: integrity, authenticity, controllability and historicity. They ensure records that can be trusted and enhance the possibilities for the reconstruction of the past. The organizational memory ensures that trusted records are preserved for as long as is necessary to comply with accountability regulations. It provides an ICT infrastructure to (indefinitely) store those records and to keep them accessible. Records auditing researches the first two mentioned mechanisms to assess the possibility to reconstruct past organizational actions and transactions. These mechanisms ensure that organi zations have a documented understanding of [1] the processing of actions and transactions within business processes; [2] the dissemination of trusted records; [3] the way the organization accounts for the actions and transactions within its business proce sses; and [4] the reconstruction of actions and transactions from business processes over time. This understanding is crucial for the reconstruction of the past and for organizational accountability


Keywords: accountability, enterprise records management, organizational memory, records auditing


Share |

Journal Article

Responsibility and Accountability for Information Asset Management (IAM) in Organisations  pp113-121

Nina Evans, James Price

© Jul 2014 Volume 17 Issue 1, Special issue from ECIME 2013, Editor: Prof Przemyslaw Lech, pp1 - 121

Look inside Download PDF (free)


Abstract: The key resources that need to be effectively deployed to meet business objectives are Financial Assets, Human Assets, Physical Assets and Information Assets (IA). Information Assets are a critical business resource for most organisations, ye t they are typically poorly managed and the potential, tangible benefits from improving the management of these assets are seldom realised. Business governance refers to the decisions that must be made to ensure effective business management and also to w ho makes these decisions, i.e. who is responsible and accountable. Very little research has been undertaken on the role and responsibilities of various stakeholders in information asset management. This paper reports on qualitative research via confidenti al interviews that were conducted with C‑level executives and Board members of Australian and South African organisations in both private and public sectors, to identify their perceptions of who is responsible and accountable for the management of Informa tion Assets in their organisations. The research found that the information management decisions that must be made, and by whom, is often not clear in these organisations Responsibility and accountability is therefore inappropriately imposed.


Keywords: Keywords: Information Assets, IA, governance, Information Asset Management, IAM, responsibility, accountability


Share |

Journal Issue

Volume 15 Issue 1, ECIME 2011 / Jan 2012  pp1‑148

Editor: Walter Castelnovo, Elena Ferrari

View Contents Download PDF (free)


The papers in this issue of EJISE have been selected from those presented at the 5th European Conference on Information Management and Evaluation (ECIME 2011) at the Dipartimento di Informatica e Comunicazione, Università dell'Insubria, Como, Italy on 8‑9 September 2011.


The issue has been guest edited bythe Conference Chair, Professor Walter Castelnovo, and the Programme Chair, Professor Elena Ferrari, both from University of Insubria, Como, Italy.


walter_castelnovo    elena_ferrari 


Keywords: crime analysis, GIS, geostatistics, intelligence-led policing, predictive dissemination, data mining, boundary spanning, IS outsourcing, relationships management, accountability, enterprise records management, organizational memory, records auditing, knowledge economy, measuring effectiveness, performance indicator, assess of knowledge, enterprise information systems, enterprise recourse planning systems, customer relations management systems, supply chain management systems, community informatics, requirements engineering, microenterprise, technology adoption, indigenous business, socio-technical system, SMEs, IT/IS, lemon market theory, ISV, ambient assisted living, field trials, ageing technology users, enterprise architecture, architectural alignment, Zachman framework, TOGAF, GERAM, E2AF, payments, framework, mobile, value, data governance, data management, data quality, framework, business model, business case, strategy, operations, management, implementation


Share |