Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata



In the ABS future model, system workflows will be assembled and released 'to order', potentially in a 'plug and play' way, from a library of shared interchangeable services, rather than building individual systems for each collection or family of collections.  Using the 'term' called 'Assemble' for this phase instead of 'Build' would help in changing the culture towards assembly from re-usable components.  This change would also help orient the GSBPM towards supporting the CSPA's 'plug and play' initiative, and modernization more generally, while not precluding statistical organizations who don't have an architecture oriented toward reusable components, and therefore need to build more of the components that they will then assemble.


Statistics Sweden

Change the word ‘Build’ into the word ‘Create’ in order to make the move from tailor-made systems towards re-use and plug-and-play clearer.

Enhance the testing in phase 3. The word test should be added to the name of the phase, resulting in ‘Create and Test’. Modify the phase structure so that it is symmetric with respect to Create and Test. Give them a successive ordering. This is shown in detail below. Experiences at Statistics Sweden make us underline the importance of testing.


UNECE 2009

 Suggestion from Statistics Sweden

3      Build

3      Create and Test

3.1   Build data collection instrument

3.1   Create data collection instrument

3.2   Build or enhance process components

3.2   Test data collection instrument

3.3   Configure workflows

3.3   Create or enhance process components

3.4   Test production system

3.4   Test process components

3.5   Test statistical business process

3.5   Configure workflow

3.6   Finalize production system

3.6   Test workflow

  • Include Pilot surveys in ‘Test workflow’.

Please indicate your support for this change using the stars and legend below

  • 5* (We should do this)
  • 4* (Good idea, but need to discuss)
  • 3* (I am not sure, we need to discuss)
  • 2* (Should not make the change, but need to discuss)
  • 1* (Should not make this change)



Page viewed 2352 times by 17 users since 27 Sep, 2013
Name Last viewed Times viewed
Anonymous 31 Mar, 2015 02:18 2290
Pilar Rey del Castillo 06 Mar, 2014 11:31 1
Anne Cheong 09 Dec, 2013 03:12 1
Thérèse Lalor 11 Nov, 2013 00:18 22
Robert McLellan 10 Nov, 2013 23:32 6
Steven Vale 14 Oct, 2013 22:22 2
Jenny Linnerud 14 Oct, 2013 22:21 3
Wilhelmus Kloek 14 Oct, 2013 22:21 5
Gary Dunnet 14 Oct, 2013 22:21 3
Jill Pobjoy 14 Oct, 2013 12:42 2
Mats Bergdahl 14 Oct, 2013 10:42 4
Lynne Bismire 14 Oct, 2013 03:53 2
Eden Brinkley 14 Oct, 2013 02:38 4
Adam Brown 13 Oct, 2013 23:03 1
Tatiana Yarmola 10 Oct, 2013 15:42 1
Gareth McGuinness 09 Oct, 2013 23:37 4
Alice Born 28 Sep, 2013 01:52 1
  • No labels


  1. GSBPM should support CSPA approaches, but is a neutral language for the description of statistical production processes

  2. I think this whole phase needs some serious thinking. A new name may or may not emerge from such thinking.

  3. 15/10: 

    Terms have to be translated, so the content is more important. Build has certain connotations of you just build and do not consider other options. Maybe another word gets away from that. We should encourage the reuse. Need to move away from tailor made systems.

    Build and enhance gives the feel of CSPA, maybe we can add this to some subprocesses (eg 3.1)? 

    Like checking for data availability before collection, you check for system availability.

    Action: Add something to paragraph 28 - the introduction to build phase - about reuse