Archive for the ‘Metadata’ Category

Review the definitions that were started during the meeting Tuesday and please provide any feedback through the comments functionality.

• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Organization+Suspense+Account
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Earnings
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Expenditure
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Labor+Schedule
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Actual+Pay
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Base+Pay
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Premium+Pay
• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Supplemental+Pay
• Additionally, please continue to review the definitions from the first meeting last week: http://dg.stanford.edu/?p=601

We’ll continue to work through the terms in the business questions and work on creating unambiguous definitions.  You can view the current questions (and terms in question) here: http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/cgi-bin/dg/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/BusinessQuestionWords.pptx

Feel free to begin to critique other definitions and provide feedback through the comments functionality.

• https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Evolving+Financial+Reporting+-+Payroll+and+Labor+Expense+Management

Attendees: Bryan Brown (FMCS), Rana Glasgal (UHR), Matt Hoying (FMCS), Marissa Lavelle (FMCS), Lillian Lee (IRDS), Nancy Lonhart (Medicine), Jamie Lutton (FMCS), Elaine Moise (FSS), Lily Ng (FMCS), Shawna Powell-Blunt (Payroll), Tim Reuter (OSR), Kurt Staufenberg (PMO), Andy Zell (FMCS)

Thanks to all of those who used the comment functionality on the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Evolving+Financial+Reporting+-+Payroll+and+Labor+Expense+Management+Terms) since the last meeting to continue the discussion.  Unfortunately, it is unlikely we’ll be able to discuss all of the terms in the course of the meetings so it is critical that we all find time to continue the discussion online between meetings.

Starting this week, Matt will start sending out the definitions that have been discussed for final approval.  If there are no issues voiced within the following week, the definition status will be updated to “approved.”

These minutes can be found at http://dg.stanford.edu and additional documentation on today’s discussion can be found at http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/cgi-bin/dg/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/Meeting_data_stewardship_101612.docx.  If you would like to listen to a recording of today’s discussion at https://stanford.webex.com/stanford/lsr.php?AT=pb&SP=MC&rID=62651322&rKey=2d45a2545d0a2db7.

Stanford DG recently created a draft of data definition best practices for our data stewardship groups.  This is still in draft form so please let Matt know if you have any feedback.

Link to Data Definition Best Practices

Attendees:  Sonia Barragan (RMG), Matt Hoying (Data Governance), Colleen James (RMG), Angel Mayorga (RMG), Kathleen Thompson (RMG)

Deliverables:

1. List major terms that will be considered to be in the scope of the project (all)
2. Create wiki pages for known terms (Matt): https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Home
3. Schedule weekly meetings (Kathleen)
4. Send PDF of 2001 definitions to team (Matt): http://dg.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/Research_Data_Definitions_Summary.pdf
5. Research composition of 2001 UMG Working Group on Data (Matt)
6. Draft information flow diagram (Matt)

This meeting focused on developing the scope, effort duration and deliverables to be produced as part of this effort.  The discussion began with specific examples of the impact of inconsistent/unclear data definitions and other data quality issues.  As data definitions are developed and data quality risks and errors are identified, this group will make a significant effort to document the associated business impact or operational risk.

The definitions developed in the course of this activity will not be considered “Approved” or “Institutional Definitions” until they receive formal sign-off from all necessary business and technical stakeholders.  A formal approval process and executive data stewardship council in this domain will be developed shortly.

An additional key activity will be the communication of these definitions to a broader set of stakeholders.  This training will improve institution-wide understanding of this information, reduce operational risk, and increase trust in the underlying data while providing a valuable source of feedback for the definitions produced by this group.

The focus of the definitions (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Metadata-Definition) will be on the major data entities associated with the lifecycle of a proposal and award.  Using the sample lifecycle (http://dg.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/SAMPLE-LIFECYCLE.docx) produced by RMG two weeks ago, the team will work on listing the concepts and terms that will be defined as part of this effort.  In this phase we will not be focusing on defining all of the attributes of these entities or fully describing the details/derivations of the entity subtypes.  The aim will be to make this an eight to ten week effort with weekly meetings of an hour and a half.  Kathleen will schedule the next meeting, most likely, next Thursday, June 14^th in the early afternoon.

In addition to this list of terms, the team will work to develop a graphical timeline of the proposal and award process, pointing out significant state changes and key dates.

The final deliverable of this short project will be a high-level information flow and CRUD (Create, Read, Update and Delete) matrix that displays where key types of data reside and the activities at those locations.  Matt will be sending out a draft diagram to the team shortly to use as a starting point.

Finally, at the end of the meeting, the team developed a draft definition for the term “Proposal.”  This has been posted on the Data Governance Wiki and all team members are encouraged to further refine the definition on the wiki or make comments regarding the fitness of the definition.  Please also feel free to share the draft definition (on the wiki) with other subject matter experts and get their perspective.

Defined Terms:

Proposal: A proposal is a formal funding request on behalf of the University for external funding to support a scope of work defined as a Sponsored Project. https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Proposal

In the course of daily activities, if any of the team members come across data quality issues, opportunities or develop out-of-scope definitions, please forward them to Matt for compilation.  Please reach out to Matt with any questions, corrections or additional information about this subject.

April 2, 2012
Attendees: Russell Brewer (OSR), Kathleen Thompson (RMG), Colleen James (RMG), Angel Mayorga (RMG) and Matt Hoying (UDG)

On February 2^nd, 2012, Vijay Gandra, Russell Brewer, Kathleen Thompson and Matt Hoying met to discuss an issue related to different methods of calculating proposals.  In the course of the conversation, all parties agreed that a data dictionary for Research Administration could provide value and reduce the risk of future data issues.

The April 2^nd meeting focused on the details related to creating a team to lead the development of this data dictionary and scoping that team’s responsibilities.  We began by reviewing the recent work done by the HR Metrics Data Group and some of the types of information (metadata) that we could plan on developing.

The Research Administration Metadata Team (the team) would limit the initial effort on documenting major Lifecycle Event terms in the Research Administration data subject area.   OSR and RMG will work together to provide an initial list of in-scope terms and gather any currently known data definitions or supporting documents on those terms.

It was agreed that, on the first pass, the team would primarily focus on:

• Business definitions of major terms
• (All) Technical derivations (not necessarily deciding which one was best at this point)
• Which systems and reports create, store, modify or report on the data

Although not the primary focus of the first pass, the team would also document the following when necessary and would focus on documenting the following in a second pass:

• Business rules
• Attribute definition/data domain definition
• System of record

Additionally, in parallel, RMG would take responsibility for the development data quality (DQ) metrics and thresholds.  The details of this process, the approval of these metrics and their technical implementation are outside the scope of the Research Administration Metadata Team at this point.

The team would initially consist of representatives from OSR, RMG, Dean of Research (DOR) and Research Financial Compliance and Services (RFCS).

• OSR will be represented by Michiko Pane and Pushpa Iyengar.
• RMG will be represented by Colleen James and Angel Mayorga
• Russell will talk with both DOR and RFCS regarding their representation.

Meetings will be held once every two weeks, starting in the end of April or beginning of May.

Please reach out to Matt with any questions, corrections or additional information about this subject.

1. Find More Participants
2. Prepare for “6-Minute Definitions”
3. List of Org types

Please continue to evangelize the Data Definitions/Metadata Development/Data Stewardship process to your peers and invite them to attend one of our weekly meetings.  Additionally, anyone that has an interest in the content of our meeting is welcome to attend (regardless of their business function) and as we move more into stewardship, will become an invaluable resource in understanding the impact of and business requirements around HR data throughout the organization.

We are looking to complete our final review of the terms’ definitions in the next few weeks.  Please look at the remaining terms and to expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through the remaining terms and be prepared to finalize a few more definitions (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List).  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  In the time before our meeting next week, you can leave comments on the pages (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page).  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.  We will continue “6-Minute Definitions” in our next meeting.

We are still looking to accumulate the various terms for organizations and groupings of organizations at Stanford.  Currently, the HR Metrics Dashboard has School/VP, Area, Sub-area, Department, Sub-department.  What other terms are used in your area of the university?  Please see the homework from January 18th for examples.

1. Definitions of remaining terms
2. List of Org types
3. Find more participants

We are looking to complete our final review of the terms’ definitions in the next few weeks.  Please look at the remaining terms and To expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through the remaining terms and be prepared to finalize a few more definitions (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List).  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  In the time before our meeting next week, you can leave comments on the pages (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page).  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.

We are still looking to accumulate the various terms for organizations and groupings of organizations at Stanford.  Currently, the HR Metrics Dashboard has School/VP, Area, Sub-area, Department, Sub-department.  What other terms are used in your area of the university?  Please see the homework from January 18th for examples.

Finally, please spread the word about our weekly data definitions meetings and the proposed movement towards broader stewardship activities.  Effective stewardship requires representation from many parts of the organization to help understand the diverse perspectives and uses of this information.  If there are any questions, or you need material to support the recruiting effort, please email Matt.

1. Business justification for JRC:PRO in PeopleSoft
2. Definitions of remaining terms
3. List of Org types
4. Find more participants

We are still looking for more written business justifications for the addition of the code combination representing Reclassification:Promotion (JRC:PRO) in PeopleSoft.  Please email Matt specific business justifications that you are aware of for this change.  He’ll compile the content into a formal Request for Change and submit it to Cindy Martin for review.  Please get this to Matt prior to next week’s meeting on February 1^st.  Further details on the discussion can be found in the minutes for the January 11 meeting.

We are looking to complete our final review of the terms’ definitions in the next few weeks.  Please look at the remaining terms and To expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through the remaining terms and be prepared to finalize a few more definitions (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List).  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  In the time before our meeting next week, you can leave comments on the pages (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page).  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.

We are still looking to accumulate the various terms for organizations and groupings of organizations at Stanford.  Currently, the HR Metrics Dashboard has School/VP, Area, Sub-area, Department, Sub-department.  What other terms are used in your area of the university?  Please see the homework from January 18th for examples.

Finally, please spread the word about our weekly data definitions meetings and the proposed movement towards broader stewardship activities.  Effective stewardship requires representation from many parts of the organization to help understand the diverse perspectives and uses of this information.  If there are any questions, or you need material to support the recruiting effort, please email Matt.

Attendees:   Dawn Freeman (Human Resources), Anh Hoang (Human Resources), Matt Hoying (Data Governance), Larry Niemeyer (Humanities and Sciences), Martha Wood (Business Affairs)

We will be pushing off submitting the request for the addition of JRC:PRO to PeopleSoft because we haven’t received enough business justifications to create a formal request yet.  As soon as we have a solid argument, Matt will put together a formal request for change and submit it to Cindy Martin for review.

Additionally, Rana Glasgal, the University Human Resources Assistant Vice President for Reporting and Analysis, will be attending our weekly meetings going forward.  She has been charged with improving Reporting and Analysis through out University Human Resources.  This is a great opportunity for us to help drive change.  We’ll be accumulating any known reporting or analysis issues or gaps in functionality and working with Rana to improve our data and analysis capabilities within HR.

During the meeting two issues were noted with the HR Metrics Help file:

1. The list of terms defines “Newcomer leaving within 1 year.” These should be consistent with the dashboard which uses the term “New Hires Leaving in 1^st Year”.
2. All of the pictures embedded in the page seem to have a broken link.  In Firefox and Internet Explorer the pictures are completely missing and in Chrome, they show as placeholders for missing images.  The HTML for these images are
1. <img border=0 width=740 height=113 src=”HRMetricsDashboardHelpContent_2011_11_13(2)_files/image002.jpg” v:shapes=”_x0000_i1025″>
2. <img border=0 width=246 height=62 src=”HRMetricsDashboardHelpContent_2011_11_13(2)_files/image004.jpg” v:shapes=”_x0000_i1026″>
3. <img border=0 width=51 height=41 src=”HRMetricsDashboardHelpContent_2011_11_13(2)_files/image006.jpg”  :shapes=”_x0000_i1027″>

Using the “lightening round” method, we were able to complete the following definitions: Employee, Length of Service, Rule of 75, New Hire, New Hires leaving within a Year.  These will be marked as “Approved” but if anyone has any concerns with any of these definitions, please comment on the wiki or email Matt and we’ll review the issues raised next week.

Note that the definitions on the HR Metrics page may include portions of the definition, discrepancies and derivation sections for clarity.

HR Metrics Master List - https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List

• Employee – https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Employee
• Length of Service – https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Length+of+Service
• Rule of 75 – https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/Rule+of+75
• New Hire – https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/New+Hire
• New Hires leaving in 1^st Year – https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/New+Hire+Leaving+within+First+Year

1. New Reclass:Promotion Code Justification
2. Definitions for Benefits Eligible Employee, Benefits Eligible Position and Regular Employee.
3. List of terms that are well defined as is
4. List of Organizational Groupings in your School/VP

Homework Detail:

The highest priority for this week is to confirm that the code combination of Reclassification:Promotion (JRC:PRO) should be added as a valid combination in PeopleSoft.  Please email Matt specific business justifications that you are aware of for this change.  He’ll compile the content into a formal Request for Change and submit it to Cindy Martin for review.  Please get this to Matt by Monday, January 23,2012.  Further details on the discussion can be found in the minutes for the January 11 meeting.

There was a lot of discussion about the definition/possible redundancy between the definitions of Regular Employee, Benefits Eligible Employee and Benefits Eligible Position.  Please review these in detail and come prepared with a definition for each.  The admin guide defines and relates these terms in 23.1: http://adminguide.stanford.edu/23_1.pdf.

To expedite the completion of the HR Metrics Data Definitions, please look through all terms (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/display/~mhoying/HR+Metrics+Definition+List) that do not have a status of “Approved” and note whether the current definition is complete and accurate.  We will only be looking at the terms that exist on the HR Metrics help page.  These are denoted by an “X” in the first column.  Please either comment on the page (by clicking on the “Add Comment” link at the bottom of the page) or email Matt to note any term that you believe is adequately defined.  Please use the criteria for a well-defined term from the wiki (https://asconfluence.stanford.edu/confluence/x/1wCGFg) as well as your knowledge of the business.  In next week’s meeting (January 25, 2012) we’ll discuss the submitted terms.

Please create a list of organizational groupings in your School/VP.  This may include, but is not limited to: Cluster, Area, Sub-Area, Division, Department, Center, Institute, PI, Troupe and/or Coterie.  We will be using these shortly to try and resolve the various organizational terms in order to support HR Metrics Phase II (as well as future initiatives).

Finally, please spread the word about our weekly data definitions meetings and the proposed movement towards broader stewardship activities.  Effective stewardship requires representation from many parts of the organization to help understand the diverse perspectives and uses of this information.  If there are any questions, or you need material to support the recruiting effort, please email Matt.