Two different perspectives on information from today’s Journal.
“Lab Flaws Cast Doubt on Drug Convictions,” Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2015 A3. Massachusetts looks at impact of flawed practices in crime labs and how to deal with the convictions and plea bargains based on evidence processed (or not) by those labs.
What information do you rely on, and how is it developed? What procedural steps do you or your contractors follow to maintain the integrity of that information? Is that the governance of information? How do you mitigate the impact of defects in information or the interpretation thereof?
“Tailored Accounting By IPOs Raises Flags,” Wall Street Journal, January 8, 2015 C1. Companies doing IPOs use customized accounting treatment, in addition to generally accepted accounting practices, to “help” potential investors.
What does it tell you when a company uses two sets of books? Does it make comparison of investment opportunity easier or harder? Do the variances shout out for further inquiry? Is this helpful or just spin doctoring? Is investor communication “information governance”?