Appendix 4. Frequently Asked Questions

Is there a name for this Directory?

The term 'S.E.E. Directory' has been used throughout this paper.

What benefit is there in this S.E.E. Directory for agencies?

The benefits are many to a single S.E.E. member agency. The real benefits, however, will be realised once consideration is given to uses that span more than one agency. These include:

• the S.E.E. Directory will provide a single reference point for the integration of services within and across agencies

• it will provide assistance to agencies in adopting common integrating standards, where this is not already the case

• it will provide an email address book, covering all S.E.E. member agencies, that will always be up-to-date

• it will provide a searchable, up-to-date, S.E.E. member agency Directory of names and telephone numbers for persons and organisations ('White Pages') and also government services (analogous to the Yellow Pages)

• it will facilitate the development of S.E.E. cross-agency services (for example a meeting scheduler)

• By building upon existing data sources within S.E.E. member agencies in order to provide a single authoritative source of information for the use of the entire state sector, it will reduce both duplication in data collection costs and ongoing operational costs for individual agencies in maintaining data.

Will all government agencies be required to participate in the S.E.E. Directory?

No. Participation in the S.E.E. Directory is voluntary, as with the overall S.E.E. project. However, the rules are mandatory for all participating agencies.

All S.E.E. member agencies will be required to provide the agreed minimum data to the S.E.E. Directory

However, beyond that any further or deeper participation will be optional. The initial focus for development of the S.E.E. Directory will be to facilitate the introduction of a number of key e-government initiatives, which have been identified in the introduction to this document, and clearly the departments involved in these initiatives will be expected to participate fully within the context of individual initiatives. Thereafter departments will use the S.E.E. Directory to a greater or lesser extent according to the benefit they are able to derive from it.

Will it cost more / bring cost savings?

Clearly there will be some cost to each agency in providing the required minimum data to the S.E.E. Directory. Thereafter any investment will be cost-justifiable against the benefits expected to be gained from using a S.E.E. Directory-enabled system or service. Where an agency already has a good internal Directory policy in place, the effort and therefore cost involved in building any interfaces required is expected to be minimal, as the S.E.E. Directory should be capable of being populated directly out of such systems. Other agencies however may need to review their internal systems, formulate a cohesive Directory policy and undertake any work necessary to bring their systems into line. Once this is done, interfacing with the S.E.E. Directory should again be straightforward.

Conversely, however, once a stable and robust S.E.E. Directory interface is operational, there should be minimal effort and cost involved in maintaining an agency's data in the S.E.E. Directory as a by-product of its own data maintenance activities. In addition to that, the agency will immediately benefit by receiving current updates from the S.E.E. Directory into its own Directory for the benefit and use of its own users and systems. It is quite possible in many cases that the immediate benefits derived from the S.E.E. Directory may outweigh the cost from the outset.

The initial cost of implementing and integrating any additional software or systems which may be required in order to interface any agency's systems to the S.E.E. Directory will be different for each agency, depending on its size, internal systems and a number of other factors. This is outside the direct scope of this paper, but it will be important to create accurate estimates at an early stage of the S.E.E. Directory implementation plan.

Will an agency have to have its own Directory?

In most cases, yes. The only foreseeable exceptions to this will be very small agencies with modest internal IT systems. All other agencies are expected to have a Directory policy and implementation in place either currently or within the near-term future.

In the case of very small agencies, because the level of traffic to and from the S.E.E. Directory is itself likely to be modest, there may be a case for allowing them to access the S.E.E. Directory directly for their own Directory needs. The S.E.E. Directory's governing body will address the possibilities for this, and any resulting rules that may need to be established for it.

Will each agency have to have the same Directory product as everyone else's?

Definitely not. The whole process for arriving at an all-of-government strategy on directories has followed the key S.E.E. principles of vendor neutrality and respect for agency autonomy. Several major vendors of Directory services and products to government have participated throughout the development of the strategy as members of the development team. In addition, the formulation of the policy framework has been carried out in such a way as to ensure that the whole process is as non-intrusive as possible. Agencies can be assured that any of the key vendors operating in the commercial Directory area will be able to comply with the S.E.E. Directory requirements.

Does this mean that there will be only one Directory?

There must be a single 'logical' Directory with which participating agencies can interface, for reasons explained in section 5. However, technologically this does not necessarily imply that it must be implemented with just one vendor's product. In fact there are some benefits in considering more than one vendor for the implementation of the S.E.E. Directory, for example in order to ensure an ongoing high level of compatibility and interoperability. However, in practical terms it is likely to be easier and less costly to settle on a single vendor's product to ensure high levels of internal integrity, security and availability. That said, whichever vendor or vendors are chosen to participate in the implementation of the S.E.E. Directory, the Directory choice of individual agencies will not be limited in any way.

You have distinguished Person from Role, why?

This decision allows for maximum flexibility, robustness and support for growth in the longer term, although there may admittedly be a modest increase in complexity for the simplest case of one person/one role/one organisation. In technical terms, the design for the basic Directory object structure has been based on sound data management principles. Some of the reasons why it is useful to distinguish between a person and the role(s) they hold are:

• A person's identity, once established, cannot be abolished, whereas roles are created and removed constantly. It is not only more efficient to recognise this in the Directory, but also it most closely reflects business reality

• Personal contact details for a person are held once, and updated once, for all current roles

• This provides the flexibility for an agency to change its organisational structure and roles without causing a re-organisation of all its personnel information

Are you mandating a requirement for strong 'EOI' (Evidence of Identity)?

No. But should any of the current or future e-government initiatives require a strong EOI approach, then the S.E.E. Directory has been designed to cope with that requirement. The S.E.E. Directory should be considered as simply a placeholder for information about people, organisations and other objects; it is completely neutral as to how that information is used. Its focus is on data, not process.

What about the real possibility of technological obsolescence?

The Directory policy, architecture and schema designs being proposed are as little tied to technology as possible. They have been designed to be very resilient to, and supportive of, the development and adoption of new technologies. Where technological obsolescence is likely to have a greater impact is in the area of process, where at some point an enabling technology is likely to be called on to complete an outcome.

Is the S.E.E. Directory limited to the public sector only? What about other sectors?

The scope of this paper is explicitly confined to the S.E.E. member agencies. However, as noted in the introduction, the design has been developed so as not to preclude, so far as possible, any extension into other sectors.