CACrown ArchivesThe cinema collection
Menu
Research dossier · General Reference

Information audit

extension of auditing from a traditional scope of accounting and finance to the organisational information management system

Cross-disciplinary reference desk with index cards, atlas, dictionary and catalogue
General referenceInterpretive dossier study · Crown Archives visual atlas
Record originEnglish Wikipedia
Text licenseCC BY-SA 4.0
Source revisionAug 1, 2026
Entity authorityQ6031017
Source-derived summary

The information audit (IA) extends the concept of auditing from a traditional scope of accounting and finance to the organisational information management system. Information is representative of a resource which requires effective management and this led to the development of interest in the use of an IA.

Prior the 1990s and the methodologies of Orna, Henczel, Wood, Buchanan and Gibb, IA approaches and methodologies focused mainly upon an identification of formal information resources (IR). Later approaches included an organisational analysis and the mapping of the information flow. This gave context to analysis within an organisation's information systems and a holistic view of their IR and as such could contribute to the development of the information systems architecture (ISA). In recent years the IA has been overlooked in favour of the systems development process which can be less expensive than the IA, yet more heavily technically focused, project specific (not holistic) and does not favour the top-down analysis of the IA.

Definition

A definition for the Information Audit cannot be universally agreed-upon amongst scholars, however the definition offered by ASLIB received positive support from a few notable scholars including Henczel, Orna and Wood; “(the IA is a) systematic examination of information use, resources and flows, with a verification by reference to both people and existing documents, in order to establish the extent to which they are contributing to an organisation’s objectives” In summary, the term audit itself implies a counting, the IA being much the same yet it counts IR and analyses how they are used and how critical they are to the success of a given task.

Role and scope of an IA

In much the same way as the IA is difficult to define, it can be utilised in a range of contexts by the information professional, from complying with freedom of information legislation to identifying any existing gaps, duplications, bottlenecks or other inefficiencies in information flows and to understand how existing channels can be used for knowledge transfer

In 2007 Buchanan and Gibb developed upon their 1998 examination of the IA process by outlining a summary of its main objectives:

To identify an organisation’s information resource

To identify an organisation’s information needs

Furthermore, Buchanan and Gibb went on to state that the IA also had to meet the following additional objectives:

To identify the cost/benefits of information resources

To identify the opportunities to use the information resources for strategic competitive advantage

To integrate IT investment with strategic business initiatives

To identify information flow and processes

To develop an integrated information strategy and/or policy

To create an awareness of the importance of Information Resource Management (IRM)

To monitor/evaluate conformance to information related standards, legislations, policy and guidelines.

Methodology evolution

Overview

In 1976 Riley first published a definition of IA as a way of analysing IR based on a cost-benefit model. Since Riley, scholars have outlined further developed methodologies. Henderson took a cost-benefit approach hoping to draw focus from manpower-costing to information storage and acquisition which he felt was being overlooked. In 1985 Gillman focused upon identifying the relationships which existed between various components in order to map them to one another.

Editorial summary

The public source identifies “Information audit” as extension of auditing from a traditional scope of accounting and finance to the organisational information management system. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Information, audit and extension.

Editorial reviewA dependable orientation record for establishing vocabulary, names and a first evidence trail. The current lead gives the account dated anchors—2007, 1998, 1976, 1985—that can be checked directly. The selected authority fields contribute no independent date. Its value is orientation rather than verdict, with Information, audit and extension providing the first useful test.
Editorial analysis

Why this record matters

A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Information audit”, the useful work is to connect “extension of auditing from a traditional scope of accounting and finance to the organisational information management system” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.

Evidence profile

The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 1, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q6031017. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 2007, 1998, 1976 and 1985.

Critical limits

A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.

How to read it

Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.

Best used for
  • Subject orientation
  • Search vocabulary
  • Locating named sources
Verify next

The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.

Three-step research path

  1. Establish the record: confirm the title “Information audit”, its source revision and the description used here.
  2. Expand the search: follow Information audit primary sources, Information audit archive and Information research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
  3. Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.

Questions for further research

  1. Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Information audit”?
  2. What terminology or title could unlock a more precise catalogue search?
  3. Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Subject index

Search terms from this dossier

Source & attribution

This entry incorporates text from Information audit” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.