INDEX | ORGANISATION | TIME LINE | PEOPLE | STORY | RESEARCH METHOD | COMMENTARY | FINDINGS | HELP | BOTTOM

Why was the quality of the data poor?: Difficulties in the data

A 10% sample of each underwriter's cases in the UK and Holland was auditted by an underwriter (Noah) comparing paper records with prints from the system and then confirming findings with the underwriter concerned (01067). This was an extensive exercise taking up to a day for each case (00947) and even experienced IT literate underwriters like Noah had some errors (00676). The US was not auditted because there were too many data and other problems in America (01015, 00719).

Social influence:
Technical influence:
Process: Quality procedures

Commentary
Social influence
Technical influence

INDEX | ORGANISATION | TIME LINE | PEOPLE | STORY | RESEARCH METHOD | COMMENTARY | FINDINGS | HELP | TOP

© Clare Tagg 2000