When we think about policy management, most of the attention goes to the idea of creating new laws or policies.
What is to be noted though is that the life cycle of a rule is much longer than the simple definition and introduction of a rule.
Decisions and rules determined in the past remain valid indefinitely and keep producing their effects on the group, whether the individuals are aware of that or not.
Furthermore, a decision of the past, when the reasons justifying it are no longer present in memory of the population or when they are not clearly expressed in the rationale of a law, might cause the loss of control of the law itself, whereas the group no longer ‘owns’ or controls a rule, but rather the rule impinges on it without a clear understanding of why things are that way.
Hence you might conclude that past decisions have a great importance and require appropriate attention to ensure they don’t slip out of control of the group and become obsolete, impractical, undesirable or even harmful for the group.
From this there are a number of requirements emerging and making part of the core of the solution model.
Features required include:
The decisions are archived and kept stored indefinitely, with all their related information of debate, amendment, vote attached. No data is lost.
The data have to be searchable and be categorised in an efficient manner so that particles of data are logically connected to each other.
The system should allow for proposal of amendments to any law or rule at any stage of its lifecycle. No rule is ‘final’ or ‘immutable’.
The system should possibly help and avoid the introduction of conflicting or duplicate laws.
The system should encourage the input of background or context or statistical information justifying the introduction of the rule itself. This requirement is also needed for implementing metrics and performance, which is a large enough aspect needing a dedicated post by itself.