◇ OpenCyber Academy
Engineering · Chapter 38 · English

Chapter 38 — Data governance: validation

Open, free learning for anyone who wants to protect people and technology. No account is required to read this text or its worked answers.

Chapter 38 — Data governance: validation

Lesson map

Lesson 38 published. Map, example, EX112.

flowchart TD
  N0["Learning outcomes"]
  N1["38.1 Validation questions"]
  N2["38.2 Findings"]
  N3["38.3 Adjustments"]
  N4["38.4 Evidence of value"]
  N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4
  N4 --> EX["Worked example"]
  EX --> Q["Exercise EX112"]

Logical drawing

flowchart LR
  N0["Learning outcomes"]
  N1["38.1 Validation questions"]
  N2["38.2 Findings"]
  N3["38.3 Adjustments"]
  N4["38.4 Evidence of value"]
  N0 --> N1 --> N2 --> N3 --> N4 --> Q["EX112"]

[Learning outcomes]
    |
    v
[38.1 Validation questions]
    |
    v
[38.2 Findings]
    |
    v
[38.3 Adjustments]
    |
    v
[38.4 Evidence of value]
    |
    v
[Worked example] --> [Exercise EX112]

Learning outcomes

You will (1) validate governance with the people who use the data; (2) gather evidence of usefulness; (3) adjust based on findings.

38.1 Validation questions

Verification showed controls work as designed; validation asks whether the design serves users. Kofi interviews network engineers, billing analysts, the regulatory reporting manager and two operations staff. He asks whether they trust the leakage figure more than a year ago, whether badges and alerts help their work and what still causes problems. He also reviews whether repair crews found leaks in the districts that the improved figure prioritised, which is an outcome measure. Interviews follow a written guide so answers can be compared fairly.

38.2 Findings

Users report more trust, citing badges and reconciliation. Network engineers say district leakage now matches field experience better. However, billing analysts find some alerts confusing because rule names are technical. Operations staff rarely use the catalogue, preferring to call colleagues. Repair crews found confirmed leaks at a higher rate in prioritised districts than before, though Kofi notes other changes, such as new crews, may also explain some of the improvement. Kofi reports these findings to the governance board, including the negative ones, so that the picture is balanced and credible.

38.3 Adjustments

Kofi rewrites alert messages in plain language with suggested actions. For operations staff, he adds key catalogue information to the control room display they already use instead of expecting them to visit the catalogue. He plans a follow-up review in six months. He notes that validation sometimes shows that good controls go unused because they do not fit how people work, and that adapting delivery can matter as much as improving controls. Billing analysts confirm that the rewritten alerts are much easier to act on.

38.4 Evidence of value

Kofi compiles validation evidence for the governance board: interview themes, the leak confirmation comparison with its caveats and usage of badges and catalogue. Prof. Varga reminds him to separate what users said from what was measured, and to avoid claiming that governance caused the improvement in leak finding without stronger evidence. The board accepts the evidence as encouraging and asks for a better comparison design in the next year. Kofi agrees to work with the analytics team on a comparison that accounts for crew changes and seasonal patterns.

Worked example

Kofi interviews users and checks leak confirmations, finds more trust but confusing alerts and unused catalogue, rewrites alerts, brings information to control room displays and reports evidence with caveats.

Synthetic case. Interviews and outcomes are synthetic.

Errors and limits

User satisfaction alone does not show effectiveness; combine with outcome measures.

Exercises

Continue studying — lesson 38 (chapter 38 of 50)

← Chapter 37 · Course chapter index · Chapter 39 →

Continue to the next authored lesson.