A 4 Step Model for Trusted Content


Continuing in my recent theme of information governance and trusted information including enterprise content … we know that unstructured information (or enterprise content) is inherently different and requires a slightly different approach within the traditional data/information governance context.  Organizations need to take 4 key steps to include the unstructured side of things:

  1. Identify and designate trusted ECM Repositories of record
  2. Create, control and maintain trusted content
  3. Consume, leverage and exploit trusted information
  4. Govern the information lifecycle including archiving, recording and preserving information and evidence of transactions, processes and events

Why these 4 items? … imagine that you are the General Counsel of a publicly traded firm who is the defendant in a major lawsuit. What if …

  • You can’t find the information you are obligated, under court order, to produce?
  • You can find the information … and it actually exonerates you … but it can’t be trusted as an accurate representation of the facts (spoliation) and can’t / won’t be admitted as evidence.

How can you prove you behaved in a compliant and/or lawful manner if you can’t use your own information to defend yourself because it isn’t trustworthy?

This is just one example that illustrates the 4 necessary steps to enable ECM to participate in information governance initiatives.  Do you agree with all 4 steps?  Next week, we’ll go into more detail starting with the importance of choosing the right ECM repository.

3 thoughts on “A 4 Step Model for Trusted Content

  1. Why should we have a different approach to managing content to data? If the information needs to be retained then it needs to be retained regardless of its nature. Add to that the ever decreasing gap between data and content and I think we need to be more holistic to our approach on information governance.

  2. Lee – The approach to governing information should indeed be the same whether data or content … or even paper for that matter. Retention is a great example of your point. Retention rules should be the same. However, implementing governance will vary in the ways I discuss as different systems and information types require different governance approaches. Trusting a source (or feed) of data is a completely different decision process and set of tools then say the process of deciding whether a version of a document can be “trusted” as defined in my January posting.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s