Information Sharing in Policy and Practice: What needs to be shared (or not shared) when we share information?

政策和实践中的信息共享：当我们共享信息时需要共享（或不共享）什么？

• 批准号: ES/M002314/1
• 负责人: Robert Wilson
• 金额: $ 3.72万
• 依托单位: Newcastle University
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2014
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2014 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FM002314%2F1
• 关键词: Information; Sharing; Policy; Practice; What

This proposal responds to the urgent challenges posed by the uses of information in governing and delivering public services. Disasters and tragedies have been repeatedly attributed - at least in part - to the failure of agencies to share information. Attempts have been made to fix the problem through a variety of legislative, policy and IT approaches. Yet individuals and organisations still struggle to share information well. Information sharing is a central concern across policy domains including the integration of health and social care, the new smart cities model, ending gangs and youth violence, and the controversial 'troubled families' agenda. Austerity measures are having significant effects as public services everywhere try to do more with less by harnessing information to avoid duplication and repetition. Existing research suggests that the exchange and management of data between organisations and practitioners involved in the delivery of public service has often proved extremely hard to achieve, in particular where sharing involves multiple professions and organisations with different values, standards and traditions. This has been exacerbated as governments have increasingly encouraged a more diverse service supplier base including businesses, charities, social enterprises and community and voluntary organisations. Moreover, data in itself is not enough. To be of use, data must be interpreted. This is not just a technical matter of tools (important as they are) but, also a matter of building the communities who can select and use these tools for specific purposes. The twelve seminars in this series build upon multi- disciplinary, cross-sectoral bodies of work led by the proposers, involving research and practice. These include: The Leicestershire County Council led, cross government-funded national exemplar programme for Improving Information Sharing and Management; Framework for Multi-agency Environments (FAME) funded by the Department of communities and Local Government as part of the national e-government programme in England; and Effective and Appropriate Sharing of Information (EASI)an ESRC Knowledge Exchange Project to pilot and evaluate a multi-agency development programme for front-line practitioners. We propose a three year programme of 12 seminars with a mixed composition of academics, both British and international, together with policy makers, practitioners and service users. The seminars will provide a constructive and open forum for these groups to engage in facilitated, structured dialogue about the real world difficulties that remain to be tackled. Throughout the life of the series, the principal and co-investigators will work towards establishing and nurturing a sustainable 'interpretative community' of academic researchers and non-academic users. Very importantly, an interpretative community does not imply the imposition of a homogenous world view. It is rather a matter of capability and competence in identifying, mapping and working on the boundaries between perspectives to establish the strengths and limitations of each.The nature and scope of the proposed seminars have been developed and refined in close collaboration between the university-based proposers and the national Centre of Excellence in Information Sharing. The seminar series has been warmly welcomed by other potential user groups including Local Government Association and the Department of Work and Pensions. Academic outputs will advance debates within and across Social Policy, Public Management, Social Work and Information Systems. The series will support research capacity building with activities and prizes for doctoral students and early career researchers.

该提案应对在管理和提供公共服务中使用信息所带来的紧急挑战。灾难和悲剧已被反复归因于机构未能共享信息的失败。已经尝试通过各种立法，政策及其方法来解决问题。然而，个人和组织仍然很难很好地分享信息。信息共享是跨政策领域的核心问题，包括健康和社会护理的整合，新的智能城市模式，结束帮派和青年暴力以及​​有争议的“陷入困境的家庭”议程。紧缩措施的影响很大，随着世界各地的公共服务试图通过利用信息来避免重复和重复来少做更多的事情。现有研究表明，参与公共服务提供的组织和从业者之间的数据交流和管理通常很难实现，特别是在共享涉及多个具有不同价值观，标准和传统的专业和组织的情况下。随着政府越来越鼓励更多样化的服务供应商基础，包括企业，慈善机构，社会企业以及社区和志愿组织，这已经加剧了这种情况。而且，数据本身还不够。为了使用，必须解释数据。这不仅是工具的技术问题（重要的是），而且是建立可以为特定目的选择和使用这些工具的社区的问题。该系列的十二个研讨会以提议者为导演的多学科，跨部门的工作机构为基础，涉及研究和实践。其中包括：莱斯特郡议会领导，跨政府资助的国家典范计划，以改善信息共享和管理；由社区和地方政府资助的多机构环境框架（名望），这是英格兰国家电子政务计划的一部分；以及有效且适当的信息共享（EASI）ESRC知识交换项目，以试行和评估一项前线从业人员的多机构开发计划。我们提出了一项为期三年的12个研讨会的计划，其中包括英国和国际学者的混合组成，以及政策制定者，从业者和服务使用者。研讨会将为这些团体提供一个建设性和开放的论坛，以进行有关仍有待解决的现实世界困难的促进，结构化的对话。在本系列的整个生命中，主要和共同研究人员将致力于建立和培育一个可持续的学术研究人员和非学术用户的“解释性社区”。非常重要的是，解释性社区并不意味着强加了同质的世界观。这是一个能力和能力的问题，可以识别，绘制和研究观点之间建立各种优势和局限性之间的界限。在大学的建议者与全国卓越信息共享中心之间的密切合作中开发和完善了拟议研讨会的性质和范围。研讨会系列受到其他潜在用户团体（包括地方政府协会和工作和退休金部）的热烈欢迎。学术成果将提高社会政策，公共管理，社会工作和信息系统的辩论。该系列将支持研究能力建设，并为博士生和早期职业研究人员提供活动和奖品。

项目成果

Competing institutional logics of information sharing in public services: Why we often seem to be talking at cross-purposes when we talk about information sharing

公共服务中信息共享的制度逻辑的竞争：为什么当我们谈论信息共享时，我们似乎经常在谈论相互矛盾的目的

• DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2019.1611236
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Public Money & Management
• 影响因子: 2.5
• 作者: Cornford J

Debate: Information sharing is dead-long live information sharing! Current challenges and looking ahead

辩论：信息共享是死的信息共享！

• DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2019.1611234
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Public Money & Management
• 影响因子: 2.5
• 作者: Wilson R

Editorial: Information sharing-Easy to say much harder to do than we want to believe!

社论：信息共享——说起来容易做起来比我们想象的要困难得多！

• DOI: 10.1080/09540962.2019.1611231
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Public Money & Management
• 影响因子: 2.5
• 作者: Wilson R