Statistical organisations using GSIM often face similar challenges in implementing the model. Information objects in GSIM are interlinked in a way that small differences in the way organizations interpret GSIM objects can lead to very different understanding of how to use them. Also, as a more technical and recent model, GSIM needs support to develop a user community. Users of the model can greatly benefit from learning what technical options other model users chose. These needs were strongly expressed also at the ModernStat World Workshop 2019. The activities of the Supporting Standards Group in 2019 also showed some inconsistencies and needs for clarifications in GSIM v1.2.

To address these needs, the Supporting Standards Group proposed to create a dedicated task team on GSIM in Modernisation Workshop 2019. Given the limited resources, it was decided that the task team would start in April 2020. 

While there is strong need for more work on GSIM, it is not yet clear which direction/output the task team should aim in 2020. Following work areas have been suggested: 

  1. “Soft updates” of GSIM to clarify ambiguous points and fix minor errors (more significant error needs to be compiled for the next GSIM revision)
  2. Review of GSIM User Guide (2012) and update it to reflect changes made in GSIM v1.2 and recent experience
  3. Review of other GSIM supporting documents (e.g. Specification, Communication)
  4. Extension of GSIM Group(s) - Structure Group, Business Group

Which work area do you think is most needed? Do you have other idea for work in 2020? Any comment on the work for 2020 is welcome! 

  • No labels

4 Comments

  1. Essi Kaukonen

    02 Mar, 2020

    Comments and ideas concerning the suggested work areas for the GSIM work 2020 from NSO Finland:

    1. Relevant area for work. Criteria for the minor and significant errors should be defined before starting the actual work.
    2. Not our top-priority. Could the recent experience part be a continuously updated web-site? 
    3. Relevant area for work, could this be handled with a smaller task team?
    4. In our opinion, extensions to Business Group and Exchange Group would be useful. The Exchange Group would require additions regarding administrative data and new data sources or some other way balance the level of detail of different kind of data. Also, dissemination could be further elaborated. 

    In general, we think it is important to continue the valuable work with GSIM.

    Br, Essi and Mikko


  2. Jenny Linnerud

    05 Mar, 2020

    I agree with the 4 work areas in the order in which they are listed by UNECE, although I would prefer the Communication document to be priotitised before the Specification document. I might even prioritise the Communication before the update of the User Guide. Anyone starting out with GSIM will however be confused that the User Guide does not refer to the current GSIM v1.2. I agree with NSO Finland that 3 could be handled by a smaller task team. I also think it is important to continue the valuable work with GSIM.

    I see that not many people are interested in an update of the Communication document.

    A quick check indicates that there is not much to do:

    • paragraph 9 refers to 110 information objects. Maybe we should make it more future proof and write over 100 information objects.
    • figures 5 and 6 need to be updated to be consistent with GSBPM v5.1

    Hopefully all links are still OK, but I didn’t check those.

    An update of the Communication document is not important for those already working with GSIM, but I  think it is important for anyone just starting out.

  3. InKyung Choi

    05 Mar, 2020

    (Feedback from Italy; 5th March, 2020)

    I would give priority to the first and the last ("Soft updates" of GSIM to clarify ambiguous points and fix minor errors,  Extension of GSIM Group(s) - Structure Group, Business Group).

    In particular, I think it is important:

    - to revise and clarify some IOs definitions and explanatory notes, especially for the Business Group but not only.

    - to extend/improve the Structure group, especially for the part related to reference metadata

    - to extend/improve the Exchange group, especially for improving the descriptions of different output types.

  4. Francine Kalonji

    08 Apr, 2020

    Hi InKyung Choi!

    Here is Canada's input:

    1. point 1 is definitely a priority => clarification of ambiguous points, fixing errors; it should probably incorporate changes proposed by the Metadata Glossary group.
    2. Point 3 also is definitely one: It is most likely to be consulted to understand GSIM.
    3. Point 2 is next, especially if we wanted people to start using GSIM; a User Guide is helpful.
    4. Point 4 is last because it involves more work; it would be great to do it though. Do we already have suggestions or ideas of the extent of the change? Is it about extending by adding new objects etc.. or simply modifying/clarifying definitions/texts? In which case, this should be covered in point 1.

    For us, in the shorter term, we should concentrate on fixing the incoherent parts of v1.2, instead of (or prior to) extending GSIM.