A strategic approach to making sense of the “wicked” problem of ERM
| Date | 19 July 2013 |
| Pages | 104-135 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/RMJ-04-2013-0009 |
| Published date | 19 July 2013 |
| Author | Julie McLeod,Sue Childs |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
A strategic approach to making
sense of the “wicked” problem
of ERM
Julie McLeod and Sue Childs
School of Computing, Engineering and Information Sciences,
Faculty of Engineering and Environment, Northumbria University,
Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to provide an approach to viewing the “wicked” problem of
electronic records management (ERM), using the Cynefin framework, a sense-making tool. It
re-conceptualises the ERM challenge by understanding the nature of the people issues. This supports
decision making about the most appropriate tactics to adopt to effect positive change.
Design/methodology/approach – Cynefin was used to synthesise qualitative data from an
empirical research project that investigated strategies and tactics for improving ERM.
Findings – ERM may be thought of as a dynamic, complex challenge but, viewed through the
Cynefin framework, many issues are not complex; they are simple or complicated and can be
addressed using best or good practice. The truly complex issues need a different approach, described
as emergent practice. Cynefin provides a different lens through which to view, make sense of and
re-perceive the ERM challenge and offers a strategic approach to accelerating change.
Researchlimitations/implications – Since Cynefin has been applied to one data set,the findings are
transferrable not generalisable. They, and/or the approach, can be used to further test the propositions.
Practical implications – The resultant ERM framework provides a practical example for
information and records managers to exploit or use as a starting point to explore the situation in
particular organisational contexts. It could also be used in other practical, teaching and/or
research-related records contexts.
Originality/value – This paper provides a new strategic approach to addressing the wicked
problem of ERM, which is applicable for any organisational context.
Keywords Records management, Digital documents,Digital storage, Electronic records,
Strategic approach, Cynefin framework,Decision making
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Despite significant developments over more than two decades, in both prof essional and
academic contexts, managing electronic records continues to be a significant challenge for
many organisations. This is partly due to technology democratising, decentralising and
individualising the way people create, use and manage information and records in the
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
The authors would like to acknowledge the support provided by the Arts and Humanities
Research Council (AHRC) (www.ahrc.ac.uk) for the research grant (ref. AH/D001935/1) which
funded the AC þerm project (www.northumbria.ac.uk/acerm). Also acknowledged is Elizabeth
Lomas, for initially bringing the Cynefin framework to the authors’ attention, David Snowden for
permission to reproduce his diagram of the Cynefin framework, and Bridget Sisk, Chief, UN
Archives and Records Management, whose perceptive comments helped to improve the paper.
RMJ
23,2
104
Received 25 April 2013
Revised 16 May 2013
Accepted 17 May 2013
Records Management Journal
Vol. 23 No. 2, 2013
pp. 104-135
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/RMJ-04-2013-0009
workplace. In this wild frontier (McDonald, 1995a, 2005) use of information is dynamic,
mobile and global. Have we moved from order to chaos in the electronic office? How can
we make progress? Are traditional methods of managing records adequate or is a new
paradigm required?
This article, the first of two, attempts to answer these questions by sharing the
strategic understanding of findings from an empirical research project, gained by
using the Cynefin framework (Snowden, 2010). The research project investigated ways
of accelerating change in electronic records management (ERM), gathering data from
participants across the world to discover and understand the issues and identify
potential solutions to try or to avoid. The data, rich and nuanced, required further
synthesis to make sense of the issues and potential solutions. The Cynefin framework,
a practical sense-making tool with roots in knowledge management and complexity
science, provides a different lens. It offers information and records professionals a
strategic framework for tackling the ERM challenge and informing practice, which can
be used at both the theoretical and practical levels. Using Cynefin highlights the need
to have a deeper, shared understanding of the issues in order to make appropriate
decisions, adopt appropriate management styles and select appropriate solutions. The
second article gives examples of how the findings can be exploited in one’s own
context. Both articles focus specifically on people issues which cover human resources
and human capacity, roles and responsibilities, vision, leadership, culture, awareness,
drivers and barriers, attitudes and user needs.
The “wicked” problem of ERM
ERM, defined by Gilliland-Swetland (2005, p. 225) as “a blanket term that refers both to
the practical management of electronic records, from birth to final disposition, and to
theoretical and applied research relating to the nature, management, and use of those
records” appears to be a “wicked” problem. A wicked problem, first articulated by
Rittel and Webber (1973), has ten characteristics:
(1) Lack of a definitive formul ation of the problem.
(2) No criteria for knowin g when the/a solution has been found.
(3) Solutions that are not true or false, but rather good or bad.
(4) No immediate or ulti mate test of a solution.
(5) Every solution counts, and has significant consequ ences.
(6) No criteria for proving that all solutions have been identified and considered.
(7) An essentially uni que problem.
(8) A symptom of another problem.
(9) No criteria for deter mining the “correct” explanation of the problem.
(10) Leaders/manager s have no right to be wrong.
Grouping interrelated characteristics together, ERM displays these characteristics. For
example:
.(1) Lack of a definitive formulation of the problem, (7) an essentially unique
problem, (8) a symptom of another problem, (9) no criteria for determining the
“correct” explanation of the problem. The context of the ERM problem
Making sense of
ERM
105
determines how it can be formulated. Different stakeholder perspectives on
ERM, their different needs/wants from systems and their different contexts, will
result in different formulations of the problem. Wicked problems are like a
Russian doll: the level at which a stakeholder functions will determine the level at
which they formulate the problem. A CEO might think the organisation lacks a
strategy, the IT manager a technical system, the records manager an appropriate
RM programme, the end user a method for confidential disposal of electronic
media. The formulation of the problem is the problem! The scope of ERM can be
defined, i.e. the records continuum. But organisations (i.e. records creating
entities) have different contexts, cultures and history and different contingencies
at a particular point in time, making their ERM problem a “one off” (McLeod
et al., 2011, p. 73-4).
.(2) No criteria for knowing when the/a solution has been found, (6) no criteria for
proving that all solutions have been identified and considered, (3) solutions that
are not true-or-false, but rather good/bad, better/worse, good enough/not good
enough. There are as many potential solutions as the possible formulations of the
problem[1]. There is no silver bullet for ERM. How should we manage electronic
records? Should we implement an RM programme, a system(s) (e.g. an EDRMS
or ECM), use SharePoint, make our line of business systems MoReq2010
compliant, or allow people to manage their records in the most convenient way
for them but ensuring they meet a minimum set of requirements? (McLeod et al.,
2010a, p. 21). Or are there other solutions? And as technology changes, are there
other technical options to be tried that form part of the total solution? A solution
will be chosen because it seems suitable, or the CEO likes it, or it fits the
constraints the organisation has to work within. Different stakeholders will have
their own views on how good, bad or satisfactory a proposed or actual solution is
for managing the records they create and/or use; and they may have different
views about the same solution in different contexts. A solution that works in on e
context may not work in a similar context at a different time (Stevens, 2009).
.(4) No immediate or ultimate test of a solution, (5) every solution counts, and has
significant consequences, (10) leaders/managers have no right to be wrong. An
ERM software solution (e.g. an ERMS or SharePoint) can be tested for correct
installation and piloted to see if it fulfils the requirements brief. However, the full
impact of its implementation will only become apparent through its use over time
across the organisation, sometimes with unanticipated, possibly undesirable,
consequences. ERMS result in centralised capture and control but at what cost to
the users? Bottom-up, organic SharePoint implementations support document
management, information sharing and collaboration but their devolved power
and greater autonomy can be difficult to scale up both in technical infrastructure
and governance terms (Lappin and McLeod, 2010, p. i). An ERMS
implementation has consequences for all those using it or affected by its use.
However, very few post implementation studies or failures are published
(e.g. Wojcik et al., 2003; Maguire, 2005). A software-based solution is a significant
financial commitment; it is likely to be irreversible even if it fails or has
significant adverse effects. Either the system continues to be used, with
inefficient practices and workarounds, or is finally scrapped with the loss of
investment (e.g. the cancellation of the UK’s NHS National Programme for IT [2]).
RMJ
23,2
106
To continue reading
Request your trial