Search results

Data economy is a recent phenomenon, raised by digital transformation and platformisation, which has enabled the concentration of data that can be used in economic purposes. However, there is a lack of clear procedures and ethical rules on how data economy ecosystems are governed. As a response to the current situation, there has been criticism and demands for the governance of data use to prevent unethical consequences that have already manifested. Thus, ethical governance of the data economy ecosystems is needed. The purpose of this paper is to introduce a new ethical governance model for data economy ecosystems. The proposed model offers a more balanced solution for the current situation where a few global large-scale enterprises dominate the data market and may use oligopolistic power over other stakeholders.

This is a conceptual article that covers theory-based discourse ethical reflection of data economy ecosystems governance. The study is based on the premise of the discourse ethics where inclusion of all stakeholders is needed for creating a transparent and ethical data economy.

This article offers self-regulation tool for data economy ecosystems by discourse ethical approach which is designed in the governance model. The model aims to balance data “markets” by offering more transparent, democratic and equal system than currently.

By offering a new ethically justified governance model, we may create a trust structure where rules are visible and all stakeholders are treated fairly.

The contemporary internet provisions increasingly sophisticated security attacks. Besides underlining the advanced nature of these attacks, the concept of an advanced persistent threat (APT) catalyzes the important perspective of longitudinal persistence; attacks are not only carefully planned and targeted but the subsequent exploitation period covers long periods of time. If an APT successfully realizes into such exploitation, information assets may be continuously monitored for harvesting business-critical information (BCI). These threats are relevant for the security of small enterprises, and this study aims to examine the qualitative factors that shape the security mindsets among these.

The data are collected with semi-structured interviews of six enterprises in a small regional market segment. The analysis is based on a fourfold taxonomy that delivers three mindset profiles, while particular emphasis is placed on the subjective security notions that shape the typical strategizing among enterprises.

APT is poorly understood among the observed segment, which tends to often also explicitly downplay the strategic relevance of the concept, but a more pressing challenge relates to the observation that business data is often perceived to have no value. The delivered results can be used to improve the situation.

This study is among the firsts to explore perceptions of small enterprises toward APT and BCI. The results reveal problematic mindsets and offers new avenues for practitioners as well as academics to study and improve the situation.

The competition in the academe has always been tough, but today, the academe seems to be more like an industry than an academic community as academics are evaluated through quantified and economic means.

This article leans on Heidegger’s thoughts on the essence of technology and his ontological view on being to show the dangers that lie in this quantification of researchers and research.

Despite the benefits that information systems (ISs) offer to people and research, it seems that technology has made it possible to objectify researchers and research. This has a negative impact on the academe and should thus be looked into especially by the IS field, which should note the problems that exist in its core. This phenomenon of quantified academics is clearly visible at academic quantification sites, where academics are evaluated using metrics that count their output. It seems that the essence of technology has disturbed the way research is valued by emphasising its quantifiable aspects. The study claims that it is important to look for other ways to evaluate researchers rather than trying to maximise research production, which has led to the flooding of articles that few have the time or interest to read.

This paper offers new insights into the current phenomenon of quantification of academics and underlines the need for critical changes if in order to achieve the academic culture that is desirable for future academics.