Each state does data differently, but that might be a good thing, researchers say
Every state is building its data office differently, but that might be a good thing, according to a report published this month by the Beeck Center for Social Impact and Innovation at Georgetown University.
The report, which was informed by a survey conducted with help from the National Association of State Chief Information Officers and self-reported data from the Beeck Center’s state chief data officer tracker, finds that while more than 30 states, and Washington, D.C., have established chief data officer roles, there is no standard model for how those offices are structured, funded or positioned. The variation, the report’s authors suggest, reflect how such differences can sometimes better align data leadership with a state’s specific needs.
To understand how state data offices and roles are evolving, the researchers identified six CDO office archetypes, which they said can offer cross-state insights on structures, priorities and challenges. They are: centralized strategy leaders, service providers, coordinators, policy drivers, program-focused roles or hybrid models. Each archetype, the report claims, reflects tradeoffs between authority, execution and collaboration level.
As an example, the report notes that states appear to be designing their CDO roles and corresponding offices around their existing power structures: a centralized, executive-led state might support a more authoritative CDO, while a more decentralized, federated state may end up with a service provider or coordinator-type CDO, with less authority.
These archetypes, the report claims, also correspond to the capacity of the CDO, directly impacting the officer’s ability to exceed statutory mandates. And while the report does not champion one type of CDO over another, it does explore how Ohio’s Office of Data and Efficiency, which is a CDO-led office, leans on the characteristics of multiple archetypes — policy strategist, internal consultant and governance steward — to drive collaboration.
“Everything we have accomplished is done in significant collaboration with the CISO, CIO, Chief Privacy Officer, and the Chief of AI Strategy,” Raivo Murnieks, Ohio’s chief data officer, is quoted as saying in the report. “It simply does not happen without collaboration. Without these partners, none of this would be possible. Building trust goes a long way — not just in terms of data trust, but in partnership trust.”
