20 Feb 2008 in Ethics and Compliance Offices, Information Integrity
Speaking at a recent National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) chapter meeting, I was stunned to hear CEOs and directors alike question why they should care about data quality—after all, isn’t that just the CIO's problem?
To my even greater surprise, among the least concerned in attendance were those who, like myself, were lawyers by training. Executives, Directors and ethics or compliance officers all need to recall the computer science teaching mantra “Garbage In, Garbage Out” or GIGO coined in the early days of computing to remind students that computers, unlike humans will unquestioningly process the most nonsensical input data and produce equally nonsensical output.
Garbage In, Liability Out (GILO)
Speaking at a recent National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) chapter meeting, I was stunned to hear CEOs and directors alike question why they should care about data quality—after all isn’t that just the CIOs problem?
To my even greater surprise among the least concerned in attendance were those, who like myself, were lawyers by training. Executives, Directors and ethics or compliance officers all need to recall the computer science teaching mantra “Garbage In, Garbage Out” or GIGO coined in the early days of computing to remind students that computers, unlike humans will unquestioningly process the most nonsensical input data and produce equally nonsensical output.
Many attribute the underlying principle to Charles Babbage, inventor of the first programmable device who said: “On two occasions I have been asked,—Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?--[...] I am not able rightly to comprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.” (Babbage, Charles. Passages from the Life of a Philosopher, 67.Longman and Co., 1864).
Although gigantic improvements in technology--computer hardware, programming, processing speed, soft-ware and even the development of artificial intelligence--have alleviated many of the orginal technical problems, the issue of decision-makers' increasing reliance on computer generated information and analyses requires renewed attention.
Technology is an enabler, not a substitute for sound data and strong business processes. Excessive trust in technical solutions in the 1980’s inspired GIGO acronym’s expansion to “Garbage In, Gospel Out” because so many, for example in the securities industry, blindly--and to their detriment--believed whatever reports and analyses the computers generated.
Today, neither technology nor your Chief Information Officer is responsible for failures in human decision-making due to faulty, incomplete, or imprecise data. Neither do CIOs necessarily face the same risks of personal liability, financial loss and reputation damage as other C-level Executives and Directors; nor should they. Why? Because, information integrity requires enterprise-wide leadership, understanding and involvement. Assuring the accuracy and appropriate protection of critical data is not a function that can be accomplished by even the best CIO alone. The emergence of stronger alliances among CIOs, Security Chiefs and the Chief Privacy Officer in some industries represents steps in the right direction. However, it is long past time that all senior executives, ethics and compliance officers, lawyers and directors recognized the risk of relying on CIOs to do the impossible. Understanding, Garbage In, Liability Out or GILO, should be another incentive for making information integrity everyone’s business.
GM.
