In our latest guest blog, Paul Matthews, Head of Profession for Statistics in Scottish Government, responsible for capability and capacity of the statistics profession, talks about his passion for improvement and how the system can make the statistics that are produced better and have more impact. This blog coincides with the closing of our consultation on proposed changes to the Code of Practice for Statistics, for which we plan to present our findings in the coming months.
I hear a lot of myths about the Code of Practice for Statistics. I hear things like:
- ‘I know [insert topic here] is very relevant at the moment, but we haven’t preannounced so we can’t publish for at least 4 weeks, because that’s what the Code says’, or
- ‘We will have issues with the Code of Practice and trustworthiness if we break a time series’, or
- ‘We need to publish this as a management information release because the Code won’t allow us to publish as official statistics due to quality’.
In these examples, we are thinking of the Code as telling us what we can’t do. I’m not sure why that is. Maybe we tend to think of it as the rule book that we must obey. Maybe it’s because having the ‘rules’ is comforting for us as statistics producers and can give defence if we are challenged.
A key, not a lock
Rather than seeing the Code as telling us what we can’t do, I see it as an enabler to tell us what we can. In other words, it is a key that facilitates the practical release of statistics that provide value for society rather than a lock that prevents us from being responsive and innovative. And this is equally true for the existing version of the Code of Practice and the draft Code 3.0.
Thinking of the Code as a key isn’t carte blanche for us to do whatever we want. There are still risks we need to work through. But in my experience, the Code tends to be supportive of sensible pragmatic things for users that help build trust and transparency rather than being about protocol for protocol’s sake.
Using the Code as a key
I spent a lot of time looking at the Code of Practice when I developed statistical strategic priorities for the Scottish Government Statistics Group. The priorities are about how we can improve statistical work to focus on what provides the greatest value in producing statistics for the public good. It means that there are things we will need to deprioritise given our finite resources.
Lots in this is informed by the enabling nature of the Code. For example:
- Using user engagement to help inform what users want, what we can discontinue or deprioritise, and being transparent with analysis plans to convey what we’re doing.
- Greater clarity and impact of communications to enable publications to be focused and streamlined.
- Greater use of data sources where timeliness trades off against accuracy, or greater use of granular-level data where appropriate to provide useful new analysis that is fit for purpose for users’ needs.
We have had great support and advocacy for what we’re trying to do in Scotland from everyone in OSR, and it gives us confidence that how we’re innovating is in line with how the Code was designed. As Ed Humpherson said in his response to us on the priorities:
“We support your approach and there are several features that we regard as best practice, including the identification and communication of priorities for each analytical area; the involvement of users; and the openness about the potential for suspensions or changes to some of your current outputs… we certainly would not want to require you to keep all of your current range of statistical outputs if they were no longer aligning with user need”.
When Code 3.0 is finalised, all statistics producers should read it carefully and use it as a key to enable opportunities in the statistics they produce.
That’s the secret, after all!