Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Information Quality: Managing Information as a Product

  • Diane M. StrongEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_497


Traditionally, information has been viewed as a by-product of a computer system or an event. From this viewpoint, the focus is on designing and delivering computer systems, rather than designing and delivering information. To increase the quality of information available to information consumers, organizations need to treat information as a product being intentionally produced for those who will use that information. This means actively managing information and its quality. Such an information product (IP) approach focuses attention on information quality, i.e., delivering high-quality information that is fit for use by information consumers, rather than solely on data quality, i.e., maintaining the quality of the data stored in databases or data warehouses. While the terms “data” and “information” are often used interchangeably in the information and data quality literature, the term information quality is more often used in studies that take an IP approach and explicitly...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Proceedings of the International Conference on Information Quality (ICIQ). (1996 and yearly since then), available at: http://mitiq.mit.edu and at http://mitiq.mit.edu/ICIQ.
  2. 2.
    Madnick SE, Wang RY, Lee YW, Zhu H. Overview and framework for data and information quality research. ACM J Data Inf Qual. 2009;1(1, Article 2): 1–22.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wang RY, Lee YW, Pipino LL, Strong DM. Manage your information as a product. Sloan Manag Rev. 1998;39(4):95–105.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang RY, Strong DM. Beyond accuracy: what data quality means to data consumers. J Manag Inf Syst. 1996;12(4):5–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Strong DM, Lee YW, Wang RY. Data quality in context. Commun ACM. 1997;40(5):103–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lee YW, Strong DM, Kahn BK, Wang RY. AIMQ: a methodology for information quality assessment. Inf Manag. 2002;40(2):133–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pipino LL, Lee YW, Wang RY. Data quality assessment. Commun ACM. 2002;45(4):38–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ballou DP, Wang RY, Pazer H, Tayi GK. Modeling information manufacturing systems to determine information product quality. Manag Sci. 1998;44(4):462–84.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kahn BK, Strong DM, Wang RY. Information quality benchmarks: product and service performance. Commun ACM. 2002;45(4):184–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Wang RY. A product perspective on total data quality management. Commun ACM. 1998;41(2):58–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Shankaranarayan G, Ziad M, Wang RY. Managing data quality in dynamic decision environment: an information product approach. J Database Manag. 2003;14(4):14–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cao L, Zhu H. Normal accidents: data quality problems in ERP-enabled manufacturing. ACM J Data Inf Qual. 2013;4(3, Article 11):1–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lee YW, Pipino L, Funk J, Wang RY. Journey to data quality. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2006.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davidson B, Lee YW, Wang RY. Developing data production maps: meeting patient discharge data submission requirements. Int J Healthc Technol Manag. 2004;6(2):223–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lee YW, Strong DM. Knowing-why about data processes and data quality. J Manag Inf Syst. 2004;20(3):13–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Worcester Polytechnic InstituteWorcesterUSA

Section editors and affiliations

  • Yang W. Lee
    • 1
  1. 1.College of Business AdministrationNortheastern UniversityBostonUSA