Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

 

Istat

 

Although you can invert the order of the subprocesses in the application of the model, it is quite strange that you design the frame (2.4) only after having designed the data collection methodology (2.3 that includes also the questionnaire design). You need to know at least who will be your respondents to prepare the questionnaire, and, maybe, you need to know your approximate sample size to decide how to collect your data (also to take into account costs). Thus we propose to  reverse the order of 2.3 and 2.4 subprocesses, or, at least, specify in the description of the subprocesses that they  are usually performed in parallel.

 

Statistics Sweden

  • Change the ordering of sub-process 2.3 and 2.4. Especially objects, populations, and frames need to be considered early.

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)

 

 

  • No labels

3 Comments

  1. ABS comment

    Ok, but this could possibly go either way as the sub-processes won't be completely linear.  In the ABS we retained this order, but in our case the populations, units, etc. were defined in our equivalent of 2.2.

  2. It can be sufficient to specify that the sub-processes 2.3 and 2.4 can be performed also in reverse order or in parallel.

     

  3. Discussion 31/10:

    Might cause more confusion than help for users. Perhaps add a comment? But the documentation does say that you can do sub processes in any way.

    For admin data, it is sometimes 2.3 then 2.4.