Caught in the middle?

IF 0.8 Q3 INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE
V. Lemieux, Chris Rowell, M. Seidel, C. Woo
{"title":"Caught in the middle?","authors":"V. Lemieux, Chris Rowell, M. Seidel, C. Woo","doi":"10.1108/rmj-09-2019-0048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nDistributed trust technologies, such as blockchain, propose to permit peer-to-peer transactions without trusted third parties. Yet not all implementations of such technologies fully decentralize. Information professionals make strategic choices about the level of decentralization when implementing such solutions, and many organizations are taking a hybrid (i.e. partially decentralized) approach to the implementation of distributed trust technologies. This paper conjectures that while hybrid approaches may resolve some challenges of decentralizing information governance, they also introduce others. To better understand these challenges, this paper aims first to elaborate a framework that conceptualizes a centralized–decentralized information governance continuum along three distinct dimensions: custody, ownership and right to access data. This paper then applies this framework to two illustrative blockchain case studies – a pilot Brazilian land transfer recording solution and a Canadian health data consent sharing project – to exemplify how the current transition state of blockchain pilots straddles both the old (centralized) and new (decentralized) worlds. Finally, this paper outlines the novel challenges that hybrid approaches introduce for information governance and what information professionals should do to navigate this thorny transition period. Counterintuitively, it may be much better for information professionals to embrace decentralization when implementing distributed trust technologies, as hybrid models could offer the worst of both the centralized and future decentralized worlds when consideration is given to the balance between information governance risks and new strategic business opportunities.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThis paper illustrates how blockchain is transforming organizations and societies by highlighting new strategic information governance challenges using our original analytic framework in two detailed blockchain case studies – a pilot solution in Brazil to record land transfers (Flores et al., 2018) and another in Canada to handle health data sharing consent (Hofman et al., 2018). The two case studies represent research output of the first phase of an ongoing multidisciplinary research project focused on gaining an understanding of how blockchain technology generates organizational, societal and data transformations and challenges. The analytic framework was developed inductively from a thematic synthesis of the findings of the case studies conducted under the auspices of this research project. Each case discussed in detail in this paper was chosen from among the project's case studies, as it represents a desire to move away from the old centralized world of information governance to a new decentralized one. However, each case study also represents and embodies a transition state between the old and new worlds and highlights many of the associated strategic information governance challenges.\n\n\nFindings\nDecentralization continues to disrupt organizations and societies. New emerging distributed trust technologies such as blockchain break the old rules with respect to the trust and authority structures of organizations and how records and data are created, managed and used. While governments and businesses around the world clearly see value in this technology to drive business efficiency, open up new market opportunities and create new forms of value, these advantages will not come without challenges. For information executives then, the question is not if they will be disrupted, but how. Understanding the how as will be discussed in this paper provides the business know how to leverage the incredible innovation and transformation that decentralized trust technology enables before being leapfrogged by another organization. It requires a change of mindset to consider an organization as one part of a broader ecosystem, and for those who successfully do so, this paper views this as a strategic opportunity for those responsible for strategic information governance to design the future instead of being disrupted by it.\n\n\nResearch limitations/implications\nThis paper presents a novel analytic framework for strategic information governance challenges as we transition from a traditional world of centralized records and information management to a new decentralized world. This paper analyzes these transitions and their implications for strategic information governance along three trajectories: custody, ownership and right to access records and data, illustrating with reference to our case studies.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThis paper predicts a large number of organizations will miss the opportunities of the new decentralized trust world, resulting in a rather major churning of organizations, as those who successfully participate in building the new model will outcompete those stuck in the old world or the extremely problematic hybrid transition state. Counterintuitively, this paper argues that it may be much less complex for information executives to embrace decentralization as fast as they can, as in some ways the hybrid model seems to offer the worst of both the centralized and future decentralized worlds with respect to information governance risks.\n\n\nSocial implications\nThis paper anticipates broader societal consequences of the predicted organization churn, in particular with respect to uncertainty about the evidence that records provide for public accountability and contractual rights and entitlements.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nDecentralized trust technologies, such as blockchain, permit peer-to-peer transactions without trusted third parties. Of course, such radical shifts do not happen overnight. The current transition state of blockchain pilots straddles both the old and new worlds. This paper presents a theoretical framework categorizing strategic information governance challenges on a spectrum of centralized to decentralized in three primary areas: custody, ownership and right to access records and data. To illustrate how decentralized trust is transforming organizations and societies, this paper presents these strategic information governance challenges in two blockchain case studies – a pilot Brazilian land transfer recording solution and a Canadian health data consent sharing project. Drawing on the theoretical framework and case studies, this paper outlines what information executives should do to navigate this thorny transition period.\n","PeriodicalId":20923,"journal":{"name":"Records Management Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2020-04-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/rmj-09-2019-0048","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Records Management Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/rmj-09-2019-0048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Purpose Distributed trust technologies, such as blockchain, propose to permit peer-to-peer transactions without trusted third parties. Yet not all implementations of such technologies fully decentralize. Information professionals make strategic choices about the level of decentralization when implementing such solutions, and many organizations are taking a hybrid (i.e. partially decentralized) approach to the implementation of distributed trust technologies. This paper conjectures that while hybrid approaches may resolve some challenges of decentralizing information governance, they also introduce others. To better understand these challenges, this paper aims first to elaborate a framework that conceptualizes a centralized–decentralized information governance continuum along three distinct dimensions: custody, ownership and right to access data. This paper then applies this framework to two illustrative blockchain case studies – a pilot Brazilian land transfer recording solution and a Canadian health data consent sharing project – to exemplify how the current transition state of blockchain pilots straddles both the old (centralized) and new (decentralized) worlds. Finally, this paper outlines the novel challenges that hybrid approaches introduce for information governance and what information professionals should do to navigate this thorny transition period. Counterintuitively, it may be much better for information professionals to embrace decentralization when implementing distributed trust technologies, as hybrid models could offer the worst of both the centralized and future decentralized worlds when consideration is given to the balance between information governance risks and new strategic business opportunities. Design/methodology/approach This paper illustrates how blockchain is transforming organizations and societies by highlighting new strategic information governance challenges using our original analytic framework in two detailed blockchain case studies – a pilot solution in Brazil to record land transfers (Flores et al., 2018) and another in Canada to handle health data sharing consent (Hofman et al., 2018). The two case studies represent research output of the first phase of an ongoing multidisciplinary research project focused on gaining an understanding of how blockchain technology generates organizational, societal and data transformations and challenges. The analytic framework was developed inductively from a thematic synthesis of the findings of the case studies conducted under the auspices of this research project. Each case discussed in detail in this paper was chosen from among the project's case studies, as it represents a desire to move away from the old centralized world of information governance to a new decentralized one. However, each case study also represents and embodies a transition state between the old and new worlds and highlights many of the associated strategic information governance challenges. Findings Decentralization continues to disrupt organizations and societies. New emerging distributed trust technologies such as blockchain break the old rules with respect to the trust and authority structures of organizations and how records and data are created, managed and used. While governments and businesses around the world clearly see value in this technology to drive business efficiency, open up new market opportunities and create new forms of value, these advantages will not come without challenges. For information executives then, the question is not if they will be disrupted, but how. Understanding the how as will be discussed in this paper provides the business know how to leverage the incredible innovation and transformation that decentralized trust technology enables before being leapfrogged by another organization. It requires a change of mindset to consider an organization as one part of a broader ecosystem, and for those who successfully do so, this paper views this as a strategic opportunity for those responsible for strategic information governance to design the future instead of being disrupted by it. Research limitations/implications This paper presents a novel analytic framework for strategic information governance challenges as we transition from a traditional world of centralized records and information management to a new decentralized world. This paper analyzes these transitions and their implications for strategic information governance along three trajectories: custody, ownership and right to access records and data, illustrating with reference to our case studies. Practical implications This paper predicts a large number of organizations will miss the opportunities of the new decentralized trust world, resulting in a rather major churning of organizations, as those who successfully participate in building the new model will outcompete those stuck in the old world or the extremely problematic hybrid transition state. Counterintuitively, this paper argues that it may be much less complex for information executives to embrace decentralization as fast as they can, as in some ways the hybrid model seems to offer the worst of both the centralized and future decentralized worlds with respect to information governance risks. Social implications This paper anticipates broader societal consequences of the predicted organization churn, in particular with respect to uncertainty about the evidence that records provide for public accountability and contractual rights and entitlements. Originality/value Decentralized trust technologies, such as blockchain, permit peer-to-peer transactions without trusted third parties. Of course, such radical shifts do not happen overnight. The current transition state of blockchain pilots straddles both the old and new worlds. This paper presents a theoretical framework categorizing strategic information governance challenges on a spectrum of centralized to decentralized in three primary areas: custody, ownership and right to access records and data. To illustrate how decentralized trust is transforming organizations and societies, this paper presents these strategic information governance challenges in two blockchain case studies – a pilot Brazilian land transfer recording solution and a Canadian health data consent sharing project. Drawing on the theoretical framework and case studies, this paper outlines what information executives should do to navigate this thorny transition period.
夹在中间?
目的分布式信任技术,如区块链,提议允许在没有可信第三方的情况下进行对等交易。然而,并不是所有此类技术的实现都完全去中心化。信息专业人员在实施此类解决方案时,会对权力下放的程度做出战略选择,许多组织正在采取混合(即部分权力下放)方法来实施分布式信任技术。本文推测,虽然混合方法可以解决分散信息治理的一些挑战,但它们也会引入其他挑战。为了更好地理解这些挑战,本文首先旨在阐述一个框架,该框架将集中-分散的信息治理连续体概念化为三个不同的维度:托管、所有权和数据访问权。然后,本文将该框架应用于两个说明性的区块链案例研究——一个试点的巴西土地转让记录解决方案和一个加拿大健康数据同意共享项目——以举例说明区块链试点的当前过渡状态如何跨越旧的(集中式)和新的(去中心化)世界。最后,本文概述了混合方法为信息治理带来的新挑战,以及信息专业人员应该做些什么来度过这一棘手的过渡期。与直觉相反,信息专业人员在实施分布式信任技术时接受去中心化可能要好得多,因为当考虑到信息治理风险和新的战略商业机会之间的平衡时,混合模型可能会提供集中式和未来去中心化世界中最糟糕的一个。设计/方法论/方法本文通过在两个详细的区块链案例研究中使用我们的原始分析框架,强调新的战略信息治理挑战,说明了区块链是如何改变组织和社会的——巴西的一个记录土地转让的试点解决方案(Flores et al.,2018)和加拿大的另一个处理健康数据共享同意(Hofman等人,2018)。这两个案例研究代表了一个正在进行的多学科研究项目第一阶段的研究成果,该项目旨在了解区块链技术如何产生组织、社会和数据转型和挑战。该分析框架是根据在该研究项目主持下进行的案例研究结果的专题综合归纳而成的。本文中详细讨论的每一个案例都是从该项目的案例研究中选择的,因为它代表了一种从旧的信息治理中心化世界转向新的去中心化世界的愿望。然而,每个案例研究也代表和体现了新旧世界之间的过渡状态,并强调了许多相关的战略信息治理挑战。发现权力下放继续扰乱组织和社会。区块链等新兴的分布式信任技术打破了组织的信任和权限结构以及记录和数据的创建、管理和使用方式方面的旧规则。尽管世界各地的政府和企业都清楚地看到了这项技术的价值,它可以提高商业效率,开辟新的市场机会,创造新的价值形式,但这些优势并非没有挑战。对于信息主管来说,问题不在于他们是否会受到干扰,而在于如何受到干扰。理解本文将要讨论的内容,可以让企业知道如何在被另一个组织超越之前,利用去中心化信托技术实现的令人难以置信的创新和转型。这需要改变心态,将一个组织视为更广泛生态系统的一部分,对于那些成功做到这一点的人来说,本文认为,这是负责战略信息治理的人设计未来而不是被其打乱的战略机遇。研究局限性/含义本文为战略信息治理挑战提供了一个新的分析框架,以应对我们从传统的集中记录和信息管理世界过渡到新的去中心化的世界。本文沿着三个轨迹分析了这些转变及其对战略信息治理的影响:保管、所有权和访问记录和数据的权利,并参考我们的案例研究进行了说明。实际含义本文预测,大量组织将错过新的去中心化信任世界的机会,导致组织的大规模动荡,因为那些成功参与构建新模型的组织将胜过那些陷入旧世界或极有问题的混合过渡状态的组织。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Records Management Journal
Records Management Journal INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE-
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: ■Electronic records management ■Effect of government policies on record management ■Strategic developments in both the public and private sectors ■Systems design and implementation ■Models for records management ■Best practice, standards and guidelines ■Risk management and business continuity ■Performance measurement ■Continuing professional development ■Consortia and co-operation ■Marketing ■Preservation ■Legal and ethical issues
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信