MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7161967088 · doi:10.82308/9210

Policies and practices for e-mail management at the Canadian government

2014· dissertation· en· W7161967088 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Natasha Zwarich

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineDecision Sciences
ThématiquePersonal Information Management and User Behavior
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGovernment (linguistics)Information managementData collectionData managementProcess (computing)Records managementOrder (exchange)Content analysis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As government agencies perform a large number of operations through e-mail, appropriate e-mail management has become critical within the current information accessibility- and accountability-driven environment. The aim of this research is to understand how e-mail records are managed in the Canadian government agencies and identify the characteristics that support the management of e-mail records to ensure their reliability, integrity and authenticity. It sought to answer the following research questions: (1) What are the general principles of the e-mail management policies and guidelines within Canadian government agencies?; (2) To what extent are these e-mail management principles implemented in the government agencies?; (3) What are the variations and similarities of e-mail management practices across government agencies? To what extent are they effective?; and (4) What are the current practices to manage e-mail messages in order to ensure the reliability, integrity and authenticity of this specific type of electronic records in government agencies? To answer these questions, this research uses a mixed methods approach. Three data collection methods were used: (1) web-based survey with information management professionals working at the Canadian government agencies; (2) in-depth interviews with information management professionals involved in the process of e-mail management from six government agencies; and (3) the relevant documentation. While a statistical analysis was done on the data collection by using the web-based survey, a content analysis combining both inductive and deductive methods has been done on the interview data and relevant documentation. The results indicated that e-mail is a widely used form of communication within the Canadian government agencies. The practices to ensure the management of e-mail across agencies tend to vary. The type of policies and guidelines developed in agencies varies ranging from a specific e-mail management policy to a more general information management policy according to each agency's organizational context. In addition, an electronic recordkeeping system for the management, retrieval and access of e-mail records was identified as crucial to manage e-mail and ensure their reliability, integrity and authenticity. The results show that although several participants recognize the importance of e-mail in their work, their agencies often lack to practice compliance to their e-mail management policy, guidelines and system considerations. The results suggest that to be effective, the tools developed to manage e-mail records must be adapted to their organizational context and information flow of an organization. The results stressed the importance of managing e-mail records to: (1) ensure the continuity of the activities of the agencies; and (2) ensure the authenticity and integrity of e-mail records.These findings have led us to suggest a framework for a comprehensive e-mail management program that includes five components: (1) legal and organizational requirements; (2) records management requirements; (3) systems requirements; (4) training; and (5) auditing and compliance requirements. Based on the results of the research, we also developed an e-mail management policy model that can be adapted to government agencies as well as different organizational contexts.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante, Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,864
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,000
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,209
Tête enseignante GPT0,463
Écart entre enseignants0,254 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetPersonal Information Management and User BehaviorTravaux en français237 207