What goal(s) does the governance of information seek to address at a societal level?

1. Coursework Title: Information Governance Report (2250 words) 2. Information Governance Report – General Description You are an Information Commissioner charged with the task of preparing a report on the current state of information governance. In writing the report you have been informed that you must draw on each theme of the INF6525 2020-21 module, i.e. governance of information at societal, organizational and individual levels, along with their respective concepts and methods. In reviewing each theme you are expected to demonstrate how governance of information contributes either to adding value to and/or mitigating against the risks of information processing. Illustrative examples should be included. You are also expected to give suggestions for where governance of information can be improved. The report contains the following sections (See Section 3) and will be presented in the following format (see Section 4). 3. Information Governance Report – Content a) Background and introduction What is governance? Why is it important? How can it be implemented? b) Governance of information – societal level -What goal(s) does the governance of information seek to address at a societal level? E.g. increasing the value of information processing? Mitigating against the risks of information processing? – How might the governance goal be approached? Via the Assessing Governability Framework. What are the main elements and criteria of the Assessing Governability Framework? I.e. Steps 1-4, along with the evaluation criteria for each step. • Provide an illustrative example of how the Assessing Governability Framework can be used to accomplish a governance goal i.e., by applying the steps of the framework to an analysis of the wicked problem contained within the Care.data case. • This will involve identifying what barriers existed to prevent NHS England moving from the current state or “what is” i.e., personally-identifiable patient data decentralized, non-aggregated, and not shared (risks not mitigated against) to the preferred state or “what should be” i.e., personally-identifiable patient data centralized, aggregated, and shared (risks mitigated against). Additional detail for Step 1: Identifying Problem Wickedness -Who are the stakeholders? What images (e.g., values, norms, principles) guide the different stakeholders’ views of the information problem/opportunity? – – How ‘wicked’ is the information problem? Additional detail for Step 2: Examining System Properties – Provide a generic definition of system properties, i.e. diversity, complexity, dynamics and scale – How prevalent are each of these system properties within each of the main systems i.e. the system to be governed, and the governing system – Provide illustrative examples of these system properties within each of these systems. – Give a suggestion for how governance of the information problem can be improved. c) Governance of information – organisational level Information practitioners can draw on a number of different frameworks to improve governance of information along its organisational life-cycle. Compare and describe what these frameworks are. Provide an example of the use of one of these frameworks in practice; and how they have contributed either to adding value to and/or mitigating against the risks of information processing. d) Governance of information – individual level A range of individuals and groups of people are involved in contributing to mitigating the risks of data/information processing and/or adding to its value. These include data scientists, data architects, data analysts, data visualization experts; as well as records managers, IT risk and governance managers; and end-users who make decisions based on the data/information e.g. business users, performance managers, financial analysts, etc. What frameworks exist to improve competences and skills relevant to adding value to or mitigating against the risks of information processing.