13.01.2013 Views

A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

A Local-State Government Spatial Data Sharing Partnership

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

A <strong>Local</strong>-<strong>State</strong> <strong>Spatial</strong> <strong>Data</strong> <strong>Sharing</strong> <strong>Partnership</strong> Model to Facilitate SDI Development<br />

To assist in the development of the model the identified issues were classified into four<br />

areas namely jurisdictional environment, institutional environment, collaborative process<br />

and outcomes. The importance of the contextual factors in the collaboration i.e.<br />

jurisdictional and institutional environments, have been identified by a number of authors<br />

(Alter & Hage 1993; Gray 1985; Mulford & Rogers 1982; Nedovic-Budic & Pinto 1999;<br />

Pfeffer & Salancik 1978; Pinto & Onsrud 1995; Prefontaine et al. 2003). The findings from<br />

chapter 5 also support the inclusion of jurisdictional and institutional environments in the<br />

model.<br />

The collaborative process has been identified as a core element of the model. This is also<br />

well supported by literature (Bergquist et al. 1995; Child & Faulkner 1998; Child et al.<br />

2005; Gerdes 2003; Kevany 1995; Lank 2006; Nedovic-Budic & Pinto 1999) and the<br />

findings of chapters 5 and 6. The case studies in Chapter 5 identified the issues of shared<br />

goals, defined business needs, resourcing, leadership, policy, governance, training, project<br />

management, performance management, standards, negotiations and exchange<br />

mechanisms. The LGA survey results confirm these factors and also highlight trust,<br />

technical capacity, responsibilities, communication, policies, resourcing, organisational<br />

support, training and exchange mechanisms. Finally, the outcomes from data sharing are<br />

important in measuring the progress of the initiative and are now a critical factor in<br />

determining ongoing funding and hence the sustainability of the collaboration.<br />

Jurisdictional<br />

Environment<br />

Economic Environment<br />

Geographical Context<br />

Political Policy<br />

Social Context<br />

Legislative Framework<br />

Institutional<br />

Environment<br />

Economic Environment<br />

Technical Capacity<br />

Vision<br />

Shared Goals<br />

Defined Business Needs<br />

Leadership<br />

Policies on access and pricing<br />

Training<br />

Standards and Metadata<br />

Communication<br />

Legal environment<br />

Resourcing<br />

Control issues<br />

Governance<br />

Figure 7.2 Classification of issues<br />

200<br />

Collaborative<br />

Process<br />

Shared Goals<br />

Defined Business Needs<br />

Resourcing<br />

Leadership<br />

Organisational Support<br />

Policies on access and pricing<br />

Governance<br />

Training<br />

Standards and Metadata<br />

Communication<br />

Project Management<br />

Performance Management<br />

Defined Responsibilities<br />

Legal environment<br />

Control issues<br />

Trust<br />

Exchange Mechanisms<br />

Negotiation<br />

Technical Capacity<br />

Outcomes<br />

Measurable Outcomes<br />

The grouping of the factors within these classifications is shown in Figure 7.2. It can be<br />

seen that a number of issues such as communication and legal environment have been<br />

identified to occur across multiple areas. Other issues such as project and performance<br />

management appear to be much more important to the collaborative process.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!