Domain 2: Can you migrate information without losing its meaning?

IBM’s OpenPages documentation distinguishes configuration items from instance data and parent–child relationships, with different migration mechanisms for different information types. That is a product-specific example—not a claim about every platform—but it supports asking separately about records, relationships and configuration. (ibm.com)

4. Do you have a usable risk, control and organisational data model?

A — 0: Records have inconsistent names, identifiers or entity assignments, with no agreed definitions.

B — 1: There is a draft taxonomy, but business units still interpret key fields differently.

C — 2: Required fields, stable identifiers, ownership, entity hierarchy, risk scales and relationships are defined for the first release.

D — 3: Representative source records have been mapped against that model; conflicting definitions and duplicate concepts have documented resolutions.

Evidence to retain: field dictionary, relationship map and reviewed sample. Distinguish a control definition from its operation in a particular entity, and evidence from the conclusion drawn about that evidence.

5. Have you measured migration defects rather than assumed the data is clean?

A — 0: No source profiling has been performed.

B — 1: A few spreadsheets have been inspected, without a repeatable issue log.

C — 2: A deliberately selected sample has been checked for missing owners, duplicate identifiers, invalid values and broken relationships; defects have owners and remediation tasks.

D — 3: A representative subset has been cleaned and independently checked, and the remaining source inventory, cleansing workload and reconciliation criteria are documented.

Evidence to retain: source inventory, sampling rationale, defect counts, remediation backlog and validation results.

Scoring caution: sample results establish the condition of that sample. Do not present them as a measured defect rate for the entire estate without an appropriate sampling basis.

6. Can you preserve evidence, history and reporting traceability?

A — 0: The migration plan covers current register rows only.

B — 1: Attachments and historical records are recognised, but their treatment is undecided.

C — 2: The plan distinguishes what moves, what remains in an accessible archive, and what may be disposed of following authorised retention decisions; ownership and access requirements are recorded.

D — 3: The team has traced a representative management-report figure to its underlying records, evidence and approval history, and demonstrated retrieval from the proposed source or archive arrangement.

Evidence to retain: evidence manifest, history/retention decision log and a traceability example. Specify timestamps, versions, approvals and relationships—not merely filenames.

Sources cited on this page

ibm.com ↗www.ibm.com