Economic development constitutes one of the most important aspects and without it life would become unbearable to all individuals living in the society. This process however does not happen in a vacuum and the involvement of various stakeholders, say the communities and policy makers is mandatory (O'Sullivan & Sheffrin, 2003). The roles of the State Economic Development Agency (SEDA) in promoting positive economic development is one, whose relevance cannot, to any extent, be disputed. In achieving their mission of promoting economic development, throughout the entire state, the need for appropriate data was evident (Nafziger, 1993). It is indeed true that the agency ought to have had access to the data considering the significant role they intended to play using the same information. The unfortunate thing however is the reality that laws, that restrict access of information, though intended for good, has served to curtail the progress of the organization. The organization is obviously facing numerous problems with respect to achieving their missions. As indicated in this report, the causes to the problems are massive. However, there still exist measures which can be employed to save the s agency form the hindrances they have faced.
The State Economic Development Agency though focused on doing well for the society, by purposing to facilitate the establishment of new enterprises, attracting new industries to the state and supporting the already established business in the region, seems to be facing massive opposition from the organizations which are expected to help them accomplish their mission. The inability to collect data from all the states and incorporating them in their databases posed the first problem for the organizations. The entire United States is large and getting data on all available businesses in deed uphill tasks. Considering the challenge, the only solution laid with choosing a representative satiate like Washington, to act as a guide for the operations of the organization in the state and in other regions of the nation (Nafziger, 1993).
Even though collaborating with other agencies in solving the already existing problem seemed to be workable, going through with their partnership and achieving success was jeopardized by their inability to obtain adequate data necessary for accomplishing their goals. Economic development and strategies are complex issues and for that reason, the availability of appropriate resources is a need which goes without saying. One of the resources appropriate for instigating projects that go hand in hand with economic development is data. Lack of data concerning the subject under investigation could therefore thwart the processes of economic development. The parties involved in conducting studies or implementing projects of economic development must, in essence have the adequate data if they are to achieve any success (O'Sullivan & Sheffrin, 2003).
The hope of the organization of in collecting appropriate data and thus developing a State Enterprise Database and collaborating with the State University Centre for Business and Economic Research (CBER) was expected to help solve much of the problem the agency had faced earlier. They were however limited by the fact that, The State Employment Security Department, from whom they would obtain necessary data, would not provide them with all the appropriate information. This was in light of the fact that the privacy of individuals, whose records were within the systems had to be upheld to a certain extent. Because of this requirement, SEDA could only obtain unlimited information: information that would be of much help to them (Nafziger, 1993).
Further attempts by the organization, through their senior systems analyst Ruth Blair were also frustrated. The extreme complex nature of the system and the massive restrictions as regarding access to the information made it impossible for Blair to obtain adequate information for the agency. Like the case is for many institutions, data mining within the organization is highly protected. The rules and technology measure put in place by the State Employment Security Department, excluded the State Economic Development Agency, from among the parties authorized to access their data. Though inconveniencing for the group, it was a rule which is necessary and even supported at the international level (Meingast, Roosta and Sastry, 2006).
Professional Opinion on the Underlying Causes of the Problems
The main findings of the report indicates that there exists a number of underlying issues responsible for frustrating and curtailing the efforts of the organization in accumulating appropriate resources and even forging ahead with their mission.
First and foremost, the team seemed to lack appropriate structures for instigating their operations and accessing information necessary for accomplishing their mission. Considering the hustle that the agency had to go through in finding information and data necessary for creating the state enterprise database, it can only be concluded that no appropriate preparation had been made b y the involve parties in facilitating the success of the mission. Prior to setting up the organization and formulating their mission, the organization ought to have made some important arrangements. The agency would for instance know earlier where they would obtain information and how they would obtain it. In addition to this, they ought to have gauged the limitations that they would have in accessing the appropriate information and establish remedies for handling such events. For instance, in the case of the State Employment Security Department, the members of the agency should have made earlier efforts of finding out whether they would access the information they require from their database.
Secondly, there seemed to have been limitations on the part of the agency with respect to the actual needs presented before them in their mission. The institution seemed to have been aware of the fact that they required to have information concerning the various b businesses within the state. Because of this, they never understood clearly the level of depth they had to go in an effort to find the appropriate information. At the stage where the organization is informed of the kind of information they required to obtain in order to achieve their goals and establish the database, they seem not to have been aware. After conducting their need analysis, the organization under the guidance of CBRE realized that they require obtaining a wide array of data for building their database. Examples of such data included information on; the businesses' names and address, their affiliated products and services, compensation data, employment history, nature of businesses and their modes of operations, businesses description and their benchmark industrial classification (Nafziger, 1993). With this, they realize e the magnitude of data they ought to tot obtain and thus settle on narrowing down to one specific state.
Thirdly, there was failure on the part of the state when it comes to facilitating the operations of such organizations. Issues of privacy are very sensitive and adequate measures ought to ensure that the privacy of individuals within societies is violated (Meingast et al., 2006). It is however important to understand that such protections ought not to go overboard to the extent of denying the same citizens their rights for development in the environments they live in. With respect to the trouble that the organization had to go through in getting appropriate information for economic development, one can note that the government failed to play its role appropriately. The state lacks proper structures necessary for aiding various organizations obtain data useful for the development of the society. Had it been that the state provided such institutions as SEDA opportunities to access appropriate information, the organization would have advanced in their quest of economically empowering the different entities within the entire state.
Extreme dependence on specific channels for mission accomplishment also deteriorated the agency's efforts at excelling in its mission. The firm seemed to rely solely on already collected data in commencing their operations and this seemed to cause so much wastage of time on their part. Perhaps the firm would have engaged in data collection by themselves and obtain the adequate data they needed, irrespective of the resources the y had to spend on such a process violated (Meingast et al., 2006). Today, the world of Internet and computers is very advanced and reaching out to individuals in order to register them for such programs would not have been in vain. As a result, so much time and resources would not have been wasted on trying to find access to the State Employment Security Department's system.
Further, in case the organization needed to get through to the State Employment Security Department's system, they would have employed the services of other professionals who would facilitate their ability of obtaining the required information. The firm failed to make the use of any legal services, for instance, in finding loopholes within the information security and privacy law that would help them obtain all the information they required legally.
The Way Forward
Finding a solution and forging ahead with the implementation of the program would require a lot of things from the agency and other stakeholders. Most of these solutions go hand in hand with amending the mistakes that…