Issue #40: Add annex of GSBPM adaptations (e.g. national accounts)

Isn't this purpose covered by the Case Studies?

Case Studies of Metadata use with GSBPM and GSIM

Canada submitted one for GSBPM last updated in 2014

Case study: Statistics Canada

and they submitted an article in 2010

https://statswiki.unece.org/download/attachments/55476343/Q2010_StatCan_Reedman_Julien_GSBPM.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1281090909859&api=v2

Perhaps we need to make the Case Studies easier to find?

I had trouble finding them and I knew that they existed somewhere ...

Anyone who does not know that they exist will have even more trouble finding them below

Implementing the GSBPM

I agree in principle with Jenny's comment. Case studies can be powerful tools for knowledge sharing and capacity building.

My only concern is that the content and structure of the current case studies dates from the time when the GSBPM was still focused mainly on statistical metadata. It is now used for many more purposes, e.g. financial and human resource management.

I suggest a new high-level and relatively simple structure for case studies, with questions like:

1) Which version of GSBPM do you use?

2) Have you made any national adaptations or extensions? (if yes, please supply details)

3) What do you use it for? (maybe a list of options plus "other, please specify")

4) Brief summary of implementation experiences and lessons learned?

5) Suggestions for improvement (to feed into next 5-yearly review)

6) Contact details / links for more information

If we could get this information for the 50+ countries that we know are using GSBPM, it would be a very powerful resource!

If the answer to 3) includes anything related to metadata, we could request a second, more detailed level of information based on the existing case studies, so that we don't lose the valuable resource we currently have there.

This approach could also partly resolve issue #28 about gathering information on national extensions to GSBPM

I agree that the content & structure of the cae studies needs to be improved.

There should also be a possibility to view one section/question across all case studies so that you do not have to click in one by one

in order to reach a conclusion.

This was discussed sometime ago by the GSBPM Review team.

I think the comment is not so much about a particular country's adaptation of GSBPM. Rather GSBPM is a generic model. The process steps used to do a survey collection vs admin data collection vs National Account are all quite different. When an organisation asks its staff to map their processes to GSBPM, sometimes it is difficult to see how, for example, the CPI process can be mapped.

There are many examples. Already on the wiki there are examples of Prices processes mapped to GSBPM and these have proved useful. These are perhaps not the same as a national adaptation of GSBPM. 

Other feedback has suggested that more needs to be done to address the perception that GSBPM is too survey centric. Perhaps the annex suggested by Canada is one way to do this?

That I can agree with! Not national implementations, we have that, but for groups of statistics, eg national accounts, to bring those groups on board.

I agree, the country/organisation, statistical domain and data source dimensions are all important. It would be great if we could capture them in a way that they can be viewed across countries (or domains, or sources) in the way Jenny suggests above.