September 2, 2016Doug Hadden
This is not a post about government collection of metadata. It’s about the need for smart metadata management in the execution of smart government projects.
Previous entries have argued that Public Financial Management is at the core of smart government and that smart city technology is complicated. But, that was only half of the complexity problem. Smart government requires the integration of many actors in order to succeed.
Therefore, smart requires an overwhelming number of technologies combined with coordinating institutions and citizens. How can governments create a framework to communicate complex ideas to so many stakeholders?
Through the integration of budget classifications and performance classifications.
This is all about “smart metadata.” It’s about the integration of budget and accounting classifications with performance structures. At best, it’s about codifying government priorities in a “logic map” integrated within budget classifications or the “chart of accounts.” This provides the structure for transparency and open government. It ties objectives to expenditures to assets to results. Metadata enables communicating with so many stakeholders.
And, smart metadata makes sense of sensor and other technologies in decision-making and governance. No, we haven’t given up metadata in this era of “data lakes.”
Latest posts by Doug Hadden (see all)
- The (IT) Project was a Success, but the Patient Died [Part 2] - September 21, 2016
- The (IT) Project was a Success, but the Patient Died [Part 1] - September 20, 2016
- Have we over-complicated the ‘smart’ in smart government? - September 8, 2016
- Why PFM reform is integral to smart government - September 8, 2016