Information Management Capacity Check

1
Information Management Capacity Check

• TOOL AND METHODOLOGY

2
Table of Contents
Page Overview of IM Capacity Check Tool
4 Background 5 Intellectual Property
6 Objectives 7 Key Characteristics 8 Concept
9 Elements and Criteria 10 Principles for
developing Elements and Criteria 11 Elements of
IM Capacity Check Tool 12 Element
Descriptions 13 Level Descriptions 14 Overview of
Key Elements and Criteria 15 Guiding Principles
for developing Scales 18 Lessons learned-
Interviews and Communications 19 Project Team
Structure 20 Overview and Composition 21 Roles
and Responsibilities 22
3
Table of Contents (contd)
Page Methodology for an IMCC Assessment 23 Overa
ll Methodology 24 Step 1Planning 27 Step 2Data
Collection 29 Step 3Consolidation of
Results 32 Step 4Validation of Findings 36 Step
5Developing an Action Plan 37 Elements and
Scale Descriptions 41 Additional Resources 42
4
Overview IM Capacity Check Tool
5
Background IM Capacity Check

• Library and Archives Canada developed the IMCC to
  help federal government organizations assess
  their current IM capabilities against industry
  standards and best practices and develop a
  strategic plan to improve their IM Capacity.
• The IMCC was developed in collaboration with
  stakeholders, other central agencies and subject
  matter experts in the public and private sectors.
• Proof of concept was achieved in three successful
  pilot projects. The first was done on a
  department-wide basis, the second in a government
  cluster environment and the third at the project
  level.
• Over thirty (30) federal government departments
  and agencies have successfully completed an IMCC
  self-assessment and the IMCC has had significant
  national and international attention.

6
Intellectual Property Usage Restrictions

• The IMCC Tool may only be used in accordance with
  the following
• The IM Capacity Check Tool has been designed for
  the use of (Canadian) federal departments and
  agencies, or other parties working on their
  behalf. This condition does not preclude third
  party organizations providing chargeable services
  utilizing this product in support of the federal
  government IM Capacity Check self-assessment.
  Third parties may utilize the IM Capacity Check
  for self-assessment but no third party may use
  this product for commercial gain outside the
  intended use for the (Canadian) federal
  government.
• Use of the IM Capacity Check Tool must
  acknowledge and identify BearingPoint as the
  owner of this product. Departments and agencies
  have the right to adapt the product, and could do
  a self-assessment on their own or engage the
  services of consultants to help them carry out an
  assessment. Any adaptation must still continue
  to acknowledge and identify BearingPoint as a
  source of this product.

7
ObjectivesIM Capacity Check

• Assess state of IM practices within each
  organization against a common standard. Assess
  current information management practices against
  recognized best practices and principles and
  identify level of Capacity.
• Bring together all the elements of information
  management practices. The Capacity Check is
  intended to integrate the full range of
  capabilities necessary to implement IM.
• Compare against best practices. The Capacity
  Check is based on generally accepted best
  practices, and therefore provides an opportunity
  for organizations to assess where they stand
  relative to these best practices.
• Develop plans for improvements to their
  information management practices. Organizations
  will be able to prioritize improvements in IM
  capabilities and pursue high priority opportunity
  areas.

8
Key Characteristics IM Capacity Check

• Intended as a diagnostic tool for senior
  management of the organization. The IM Capacity
  Check focuses on
• Future direction What capabilities must be in
  place in the future to respond to emerging client
  demands/changing environment.
• Capacity - Expanding/improving organizational
  capability.
• Priorities - Recognizes that an organization can
  only focus on selected improvement areas at any
  one time, and cannot be best at everything.
• Competencies - Helps identify the information
  management competencies needed to move forward.
• Senior management - Intended as a diagnostic tool
  for senior management of the organization.
• Self Assessment - Directed self-assessment tool.
  Information is collected through
  interviews/workshops, and then validated by
  managers collectively.
• Support for current change - Builds upon changes
  already underway to existing information
  management processes.

9
Capacity Check Concept of Capabilities

• Capabilities includes people, skills, processes,
  technology, policy, management framework and
  resources

10
IMCC Elements and Criteria
11
Principles for Element/Criteria Development

• Bring together the key Elements of information
  management practices. The Elements reflect the
  integration of capabilities necessary to
  efficiently and effectively implement information
  management at the enterprise level.
• The Elements are based on best practices and
  expert advice. The Elements are drawn from
  generally accepted best practices and from
  subject matter experts.
• The Elements are sufficiently robust to apply
  across multiple GC organizations. The Elements
  reflect common areas of capacity building for
  information management. This provides the
  opportunity for GC organizations to assess their
  standing relative to a common set of best
  practices.
• The Elements collectively define a comprehensive
  baseline. The Elements help to establish a
  baseline for IM capacity building, priority
  setting and action planning.

12
Elements of IM Capacity
13
Element Descriptions
14
Level/Scale Descriptions

• Capacity 1 Initial (No systematic or formal
  approach exists for this capacity. Processes and
  practices are fragmented or non-existent. Where
  processes and practices exist, they are applied
  in an ad-hoc manner.)
• Capacity 2 Defined (Processes and practices
  are defined to varying degrees and are not
  applied consistently. Basic management controls
  and disciplines for the capacity are in place.)
• Capacity 3 Repeatable (Processes and practices
  are defined, well understood and used
  consistently across the organization. Processes
  and practices are also well documented.)
• Capacity 4 Managed (A well-defined framework
  exists for this capacity. Process and practices
  are measured and managed to ensure delivery of
  desired results. Process and practices are
  embedded in the values of the organization and
  are coordinated in an integrated manner.)
• Capacity 5 Optimizing (Focus on continuous
  improvement of the capacity. The concepts of
  innovation, organizational learning and
  continuous improvement of the capacity are
  incorporated into the values of the organization
  and are consistently applied.)

15
The IM Capacity Check Tool Elements and Criteria
16
Key Elements of the IMCC Tool

• 3. Management of IM
• Leadership
• The extent to which senior management is aware,
  understands, demonstrates commitment to a clear
  vision and set of strategic objectives for IM.
• Strategic Planning
• Quality of strategic, business and operational
  plans for IM, and the linkages between plans,
  costs, benefits, resources and controls.
• Principles, Policies Standards
• Existence and use of a corporate policy and
  management framework to effectively support IM.
  Degree to which IM principles, policies and
  standards exist, are understood and applied
  within the organization.
• Roles and Responsibilities
• The extent to which roles, responsibilities,
  performance expectations, ownership and
  accountabilities are clearly defined, understood
  and accepted. Appropriateness of the
  organizational and governance structures to
  support IM.
• Program Integration
• Extent to which the organizations programs and
  projects proactively and efficiently integrate IM
  principles, policies and standards.
• Risk Management
• Mechanisms for identifying, measuring, and
  monitoring relevant risks for IM, including
  options for risk allocation and risk mitigation.
• Performance Management
• Extent to which the achievement of financial and
  operating results are embedded into the
  performance management framework for IM.

• 1. Organizational Context
• Culture
• Recognition by the organization that
  information is a strategic corporate asset
  requiring stewardship. Degree of support and
  reinforcing behavior that is consistent with
  these values.
• Change Management
• Mechanisms to facilitate the adoption of change
  within IM and related initiatives.
• External Environment
• The extent to which the organization conducts
  environmental scans and assesses their possible
  impacts on IM.

• 2. Organizational Capabilities
• IM Community
• The extent to which IM specialists have the
  competencies and capacities to meet the
  challenges of IM on a sustained basis.
• Expert Advice
• Extent to which expert advisors are available
  and utilized for objective commentary and
  independent advice for supporting IM.
• IM Tools
• The extent to which IM tools efficiently and
  effectively support IM.
• Technology Integration
• The degree to which IM enabling technologies
  are integrated across the organization to support
  the delivery of information, programs and
  services.
• Portfolio Management
• Extent to which mechanisms to plan, track, and
  evaluate the overall IM project portfolio are
  available to staff.
• Project Management
• Extent to which mechanisms to manage projects in
  the organization exist to ensure the optimal
  design, development and deployment of IM
  initiatives.
• Relationship Management
• The extent to which mechanisms or processes
  exist to facilitate partnerships and
  consultations between organizations (public
  and/or private) and other stakeholders in support
  of effective IM.

17
Key Elements of the IMCC Tool (contd)

• 5. Records and Information Life Cycle Management
• Planning
• The extent to which information life-cycle
  requirements are incorporated in the development
  of policies, programs, services and systems.
• Collection, Creation, Receipt and Capture
• The extent to which information collection,
  sharing and re-use are optimized and decisions
  are documented.
• Organization
• The extent to which information is
  identified, categorized, catalogued and stored to
  effectively and efficiently support the business
  process.
• Use and Dissemination
• The extent to which the organizations
  information can be located, retrieved and
  delivered to provide users with timely and
  convenient access.
• Maintenance, Protection and Preservation
• The extent to which the long-term usability and
  safeguarding of information is ensured.
• Disposition
• The extent to which organizational retention and
  disposal plans are followed to ensure the timely
  disposition of information, subject to legal and
  policy obligations.
• Evaluation
• The extent to which an organization can
  assess the overall compliance and performance of
  its information management program.

• 4. Compliance Quality
• Information Quality
• The extent to which the organizations processes
  for ensuring information is accurate, consistent,
  complete and current.
• Security
• Extent to which mechanisms are in place to
  ensure information is protected from unauthorized
  access, use and destruction.
• Privacy
• Mechanisms to ensure that an individuals rights
  to privacy in the collections and disclosure of
  information are respected.
• Business Continuity
• The existence of contingency plans and
  mechanisms to ensure timely information recovery,
  the restoration of essential records and business
  resumption in the event of information corruption
  or loss.
• Compliance
• The extent to which audit and review processes
  are in place to ensure awareness of and
  compliance with applicable IM legislation,
  policies and standards.

• 6. User Perspective
• User Awareness
• The extent to which information users are aware
  of organizations information products and
  services.
• User Training User Support
• The availability of user training and support
  programs to facilitate the access and use of
  information.
• User Satisfaction
• Mechanisms to measure, evaluate, and learn from
  user feedback on information products and
  services.

18
Guiding Principles for the IMCC Scales

• The capacity scales have entity-wide relevancy
• The capacity scales are sufficiently flexible to
  apply to other entities and agencies
• The capacity scales are incremental, that is,
  each capacity level within a scale builds on the
  previous capacity level of the scale
• Relative consistency in the description of the
  capacity levels across all the scales, i.e., 1 is
  1
• Each capacity level description is homogeneous
  and does not represents more that one level of
  capacity.

19
Lessons Learned Interviews and Communications

• Need to prepare interim report in order to
  confirm issues, gaps in information, and topics
  to pursue in greater detail.
• A briefing is required at outset of project in
  order for the consultants to have a basic
  knowledge of the organization in terms of
  structure and lines of business.
• The interviewee mix must consist of
  policy/operational interviewees to get an
  adequate cross-section. .
• Although not an audit, it is necessary to get
  some examples of the types of information
  reported/ examples of documentation (e.g., IM
  plans).
• Telephone interviews are not as effective.
  Conduct in person interviews to the extent
  possible.
• Due to the levels of interviewees (i.e. ADM/DG),
  some areas should be covered off with higher
  level questions. Also, keep communications at a
  high level prior to interviews.
• Team members should be provided with an
  orientation which highlights the process steps.
  This will help during the interviews.
• The interview process must be fluid. Probe the
  applicable areas and summarize the areas of
  non-involvement.

20
Project Team Structure and Expected Involvement
of Organizational Staff
21
Overview and Composition of Project Team

• Possible Composition of the Project Team
• Organizational Business/Program representatives
• Organizational IM representatives e.g. records,
  library, security, ATIP, etc.
• Library and Archives Canada Representative(s)
• Internal Audit
• IT Representatives
• Other members as deemed appropriate

• Overview of the Project Team
• Multi-disciplinary team
• Reviews IM documents
• Assists in interviews
• Helps determine IM Capacity as is and to be
• Identifies opportunities and helps set priorities
• Participates in validating results and reviews
  final report

22
Project Team Roles and Responsibilities

• Project Team Members will participate in
• IM capacity check training session
• Data collection Interviews and workshops
• Consolidation workshop
• Validation workshop along with additional senior
  managers brought in as validators
• Reviewing draft and final reports

The typical Project team, consisting of 10-15
members
Typical level of commitment and effort required
for Project team members is approximately 4 - 8
days, over the 3 - 4 months of the project.

• Role and commitment of Chair of Project Team
• Single point of contact for the client Project
  team members
• Sits on the Steering Committee
• Focal point for communications planning
• Provides QA role
• Responsible for ensuring teams logistics
• Garnering executive support
• Client spokesperson for internal and external
  briefings

23
Methodology for an IMCC Assessment
24
Overall Methodology and Timeline for Assessment

• Joint consultant-organizational team (Project
  Team) is trained in implementing Capacity Check.
• A mix of techniques are used to collect the
  information to do the assessment, including
  workshops, interviews, and review of
  documentation.
• Senior management from the organization being
  assessed is involved throughout the process.
• Findings are consolidated and an assessment is
  done by joint consultant-organizational Project
  team.
• Follow-up group sessions are held with a
  different cross section of senior management team
  from the organization being assessed, and the
  Project Team to validate the findings, the
  capability ratings and the opportunities for
  improvement..
• The final step is preparation and approval of a
  report outlining the current and future state and
  an action plan for the resulting opportunities
  and priorities.

25
Overall Methodology andTimeline for Assessment
(contd)
3 4 months

• Core project team
• Experts in
• IM
• Program delivery
• Information technology
• Organizational context
• User context

Project Team 0.5 - 1 days
Project Team 1 - 2 days
Project Team and Senior Management .1- 2 days
Project Team 2 - 2.5 days
Organizational managers who are knowledgeable of
the organizations IM practices
26
IMCC Methodology
Note The following represents an overview of
the IMCC Methodology. LAC recommends that the
Methodology be followed as shown to obtain
maximum input from stakeholders and
organization-wide buy-in for planned priorities.
27
Step 1 Planning
DELIVERABLES
ACTIVITIES
1.1 Project initiation 1.2 Briefing of
organization 1.3 Project team training 1.4 Works
hop/interview planning 1.5 Documentation review
1.6 Develop communications plan
1.7 Presentation to senior management (if
desired)

• Workplan and schedule
• Training manual
• Interviewee list/ no. of interviews
• Interview/workshop guide and info. Package
• List of documentation to be reviewed
• Communiques

• Challenges
• Obtaining management commitment and resources
  support to the project.
• Establishing an interviewee list that is
  representative of the organization (e.g., by
  management level, sector, region, operational
  versus policy). Between 8 to 10 interviews and 1
  to 2 interview workshops are standard.
• Customizing and establishing the appropriate
  level of detail for the interview guide and
  information package to be distributed to managers.

28
Step 1 - Sample Assessment Timeline
29
Step 2 - Data Collection
ACTIVITIES
DELIVERABLES
2.1 Develop/adapt interview and workshop
guides 2.2 Schedule and Conduct interviews and
workshops 2.3 On-line survey (if and when
required) 2.4 Documentation review 2.5 Summarize
findings

• Interview and workshop guides
• Interview and workshop notes
• On-line survey results (when required)
• Results of documentation review
• Interview/workshop notes reported by criteria

• Challenges
• Ensuring all criteria are covered through
  interviews/workshops.
• Reporting findings in a systematic/structured
  approach based on Capacity Check criteria.
• Confidentiality of interviews.
• Focus on actual status rather than hypothetical
  (i.e., clearly distinguish between what the
  organization should be doing versus what the
  organization is actually doing at this time).

30
Step 2 - Data Collection Approaches
Interviews with senior managers and other
internal and external stakeholders.
Document and literature review.
Workshops and site visits.
31
Step 2 - Data Collection Process
Workshops tend to be for senior staff/management.
Typical size is 12-15 participants. Two
workshops should be enough for most organizations.
Interviews tend to be for executive management.
The number of interviews depends on the size and
breadth of the organizationtypically 12-15, but
will vary.
Data collection efforts include organizational
policies and guides, performance reports, org
structure, governance models, IM and strategic
plans. Any relevant documentation identified
during the interviews is also collected and
reviewed.
Interviews questions are sent to interviewees in
advance. A Project Team member attends with the
consultant conducting the interview. The Project
Team member helps in taking notes and
consolidating findings
32
Step 3 - Consolidation of Results
DELIVERABLES
ACTIVITIES
3.1 Consolidate findings by criteria 3.2 Project
team workshop to summarize findings and
opportunities for improvement/ issues for each
criteria 3.3 Project team establishes preliminary
rating for each criteria, and rationale 3.4 Prepar
e preliminary report

• Findings/ opportunities by criteria
• Conclusions reported by major element
• Ratings as per criteria, as-is and to-be

• Challenges
• Identifying overall patterns/trends given sectors
  within organization often operate in a different
  business environment.
• Ratings and priorities should be secondary to
  findings, conclusions and improvement
  opportunities.

33
Step 3 - Consolidated Results Template (prepared
for each criteria)
Opportunities
Findings and Issues

• Identified opportunities related to each criteria
  are inserted.

• Summary of findings and issues related to each
  criteria is inserted.

CAPACITY 1 2 3 4 5
Roles and Responsibilities The extent to which IM roles and responsibilities are clearly defined, understood and accepted. Appropriateness of the organization and governance structures to support IM. IM roles and responsibilities are not well defined. The organization and governance structures are not appropriate for the management of IM initiatives. IM roles and responsibilities are generally defined but not well understood. Some overlaps and gaps exist vis-à-vis roles and responsibilities. Minimal governance structures exist in support of IM. The IM governance structure may be fragmented or inappropriately positioned within the organization. IM roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and understood, and generally aligned with the organizations objectives. Little or no overlaps or gaps in IM responsibilities exist. The governance structure is appropriately positioned within the organization. Effective governance structures are in place. Changes to IM roles, responsibilities, organization and governance structures are made quickly and pro-actively following regular consultation with stakeholders. An IM champion is responsible for ensuring the integration of IM practices across both administrative and program areas. IM roles, responsibilities, organization and governance structures are continuously reviewed and updated to reflect changing business and technology environments.
34
Step 3 - Assessing the Capabilities- As Is and
To be assessment - Sample

• Current capabilities are assessed based on key
  elements of the IM Capacity Check, and criteria
  provided for each key element.
• The capabilities depicted within the criteria
  represent different states or plateaus that the
  organization may strive to achieve. The
  descriptions are incremental.
• The capability descriptions are based on
  generally recognized best practices, but have
  been customized to reflect the Government of
  Canada context.
• The Organization identifies which level of
  "maturity" would be the most appropriate in
  support of its business needs, priorities and
  consistent with its capabilities.
• A rating system of 1 to 5 is used. A rating
  of 5 does not necessarily mean goodness, but
  rather, maturity of capability. The ideal
  maturity rating for any area is dependent on the
  needs of the Organization.

CAPACITY 1 2 3 4 5
Roles and Responsibilities The extent to which IM roles and responsibilities are clearly defined understood and accepted. Appropriateness of the organization and governance structures to support IM. IM roles and responsibilities are not well defined. The organization and governance structures are not appropriate for the management of IM initiatives. IM roles and responsibilities are generally defined but not well understood. Some overlaps and gaps exist vis-à-vis roles and responsibilities. Minimal governance structures exist in support of IM. The IM governance structure may be fragmented or inappropriately positioned within the organization. IM roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and understood, and generally aligned with the organizations objectives. Little or no overlaps or gaps in IM responsibilities exist. The governance structure is appropriately positioned within the organization. Effective governance structures are in place. Changes to IM roles, responsibilities, organization and governance structures are made quickly and pro-actively following regular consultation with stakeholders. An IM champion is responsible for ensuring the integration of IM practices across both administrative and program areas. IM roles, responsibilities, organization and governance structures are continuously reviewed and updated to reflect changing business and technology environments.
Where the organization may strive to be in the
future
Existing maturity
Future capability
35
Step 3 - As-Is and To-Be Assessments overview
36
Step 4 - Validation of Findings
ACTIVITIES
DELIVERABLES
4.1 Conduct workshops with Senior Managers
(Validators) and the Project Team to validate
findings, conclusions and ratings 4.2 Discuss
relative importance of criteria and opportunities
for improvement 4.3 Update report

• Validation of the findings, conclusions and
  ratings
• Opportunities for improvement
• Establish 5-10 priorities

• Challenges
• Adopting a forward looking strategic approach.
• Being honest about major improvement opportunity
  areas.
• Reaching consensus on priority areas of
  improvement.
• The Validators may dictate the approach for the
  deliverables of this session. This methodology
  is sufficiently flexible to allow a customized
  approach to capture the deliverables.

37
Step 5 Developing an Action Plan
ACTIVITIES
DELIVERABLES
5.1 Present results to senior management 5.2 Senio
r management assesses where the organization
should be in terms of target capability
ratings 5.3 Senior management prioritizes the
criteria and opportunities 5.4 Develop action
plan

• Target capability ratings
• Relative priority of criteria
• Ranking of opportunities
• Implementation strategy and action plan

• Challenges
• Senior management needs to take ownership of the
  results.
• Developing an action oriented plan. The
  organization needs to focus on the high priority
  areas.
• Summarizing and reporting the findings in a
  manner that accommodates needs of different
  levels of management. The results will need to
  be communicated on an organization-wide basis.
• Need to maintain linkages between the various
  initiatives currently ongoing in the organization
  in support of IM.

38
Step 5 - Summary of Priorities and Opportunities
- Template
To facilitate the prioritization of the projects,
we graph them in the chart below, based on two
factors level of effort to implement, and
expected impact that the initiative will have on
the organization. Those of low effort and high
impact may be likely candidates to begin with, to
gain some initial successes.
Opportunity 5
Opportunity 2
Opportunity 4
Opportunity 1
Opportunity 3
39
Step 5 - Transition Map Template
This graph outlines the various opportunities
and their intended occurrence over time.
Medium Term
Short Term
Long Term
Opportunity 1
Opportunity 2
Opportunity 3
Opportunity 4
Year 1
Year 2
Year 3
40
Step 5 - Contents of Assessment Report

• Executive Summary
• Key Themes
• Summary of Findings
• Highlights of Findings
• Projects
• Action Plan
• Background
• Overview
• Objectives of the Capacity Check
• Key Characteristics
• Key IM Elements Examined
• The Mechanics of the Capacity Check
• Project Objectives, Scope and Process Overview
  
• Summary of IM Capacity Check Assessment findings/
  opportunities (by criteria)
• Lessons Learned
• Appendix A - Background Information
• Interviews
• Workshops

41
Element and Scale Descriptions
Note Due to proprietary considerations, full
descriptions of the original 6 IMCC Elements and
32 Criteria and the rating scales are only
available from Library and Archives Canada.
Contact us via e-mail at IMGI_at_lac-bac.gc.ca
42
Additional Resources
After a IM Capacity Check is completed Library
and Archives Canada has a number of Guides, Tools
and Best Practices to help improve IM Capacity in
your areas of priority and need. Additional
material useful for conducting an IM Capacity
Check assessments such as Interview Guides and
Communiqués are also available. For information
please contact Information Management
Centre Email imgi_at_archives.ca Telephone (819)
934-7519