Have a personal or library account? Click to login
A System for Managing the Quality of Official Statistics Cover

A System for Managing the Quality of Official Statistics

Journal of Official Statistics
Volume 30 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)
By: Paul Biemer,  Dennis Trewin,  Heather Bergdahl and  Lilli Japec  
Open Access
|Sep 2014

References

  1. Andersen, R., J. Kaspar, and M. Frankel. 1979. Total Survey Error. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
    Search in Google Scholar
  2. Baldrige Performance Excellence Program 2013. The 2013-2014 Criteria for Performance Excellence. Available at: http://www.nist.gov/baldrige/ (accessed August 3, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  3. Barkley, B.T. 2004. Project Risk Management. New York: McGraw Hill Professional.
    Search in Google Scholar
  4. Biemer, P. 2011. Latent Class Analysis of Survey Error. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/9780470891155
    Search in Google Scholar
  5. Biemer, P. 2014. “Comment on ‘On Information Quality’ by Kenett and Shmueli.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A. Vol. 177, Part 1: 27-29.
    Search in Google Scholar
  6. Biemer, P. and L. Lyberg. 2003. Introduction to Survey Quality. New York: John Wiley & Sons.10.1002/0471458740
    Search in Google Scholar
  7. Biemer, P. and D. Trewin. 2012. Development of Quality Indicators at Statistics Sweden. Report to Statistics Sweden, January 2012.
    Search in Google Scholar
  8. Biemer, P. and D. Trewin. 2013. A Second Application of the ASPIRE Quality Evaluation System for Statistics Sweden. Report to Statistics Sweden, January 2013.
    Search in Google Scholar
  9. Biemer, P. and D. Trewin. 2014. A Third Application of ASPIRE for Statistics Sweden. Report to Statistics Sweden, January 2014.
    Search in Google Scholar
  10. Brackstone, G. 1999. “Managing Data Quality in a Statistical Agency.” Survey Methodology 25: 139-149.
    Search in Google Scholar
  11. Breyfogle, F. 2003. Implementing Six Sigma, 2nd edition. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    Search in Google Scholar
  12. Conley-Tyler, M. 2005. “A Fundamental Choice: Internal or External Evaluation?” Evaluation Journal of Australasia 4: 3-11.10.1177/1035719X05004001-202
    Search in Google Scholar
  13. COSO, 2004. Enterprise Risk Management - Integrated Framework. Available at: http:// www.coso.org/documents/coso_erm_executivesummary.pdf (accessed August 3, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  14. COSO, 2013. Internal Control - Integrated Framework, 2013. Available at: http://www.coso.org/documents/coso%202013%20icfr%20executive_summary.pdf (accessed August 3, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  15. Couper, M. and L. Lyberg. 2005. “The Use of Paradata in Survey Research.” In Proceedings of the 55th Session of the International Statistical Institute, Sydney, Australia, April 7, 2005. Available at: http://isi.cbs.nl/iamamember/CD6-Sydney2005/ISI_Final_Proceedings.htm (accessed June 26, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  16. Curtin, R., S. Presser, and E. Singer. 2000. “The Effects of Response Rate Changes on the Index of Consumer Sentiment.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64: 413-428.10.1086/31863811171024
    Search in Google Scholar
  17. Dalenius, T. 1967. Nonsampling Errors in Census and Sample Surveys. Report no. 5 in the research project Errors in Surveys, Stockholm University.
    Search in Google Scholar
  18. Deming, E. 1944. “On Errors in Surveys.” American Sociological Review 9: 359-369.10.2307/2085979
    Search in Google Scholar
  19. Deming, E. 1986. Out of the Crisis. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    Search in Google Scholar
  20. EFQM, 2013. “An Overview of the Excellence Model.” Available at: https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www2.efqm.org/en/PdfResources/EFQM%2520Excellence%2520Model%25202013%520EN%2520extract.pdf&sa=U&ei=9BasU4nkHsqTqAbUhIGQCg&ved=0CAUQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNHthJnhRPIS1t6cfa4Ka9ePXOLRxg (accessed June 26, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  21. Eltinge, J., P. Biemer, and A. Holmberg. 2013. “A Potential Framework for Integration of Architecture and Methodology to Improve Statistical Production Systems.” Journal of Official Statistics 29: 125-145. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0007.10.2478/jos-2013-0007
    Search in Google Scholar
  22. European Statistical System (ESS) 2011. “Quality Assurance Framework of the European Statistical System, Version 1.1.” Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_PUBLIC/QAF_2012/EN/QAF_2012-EN.PDF (accessed August 9, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  23. Eurostat 2005. “European Statistics Code of Practice, Revised Edition.” Available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-32-11-955/EN/KS-32-11-955-EN.PDF (accessed June 26, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  24. Eurostat 2009. Regulation (EC) No 223/2009 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2009, Eurostat General/Standard report, Luxembourg, April 4-5. Available at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:R0223 (accessed June 18, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  25. Gonzales, M.E., J.L. Ogus, G. Shapiro, and B.J. Tepping. 1975. “Standards for Discussion and Presentation of Errors in Surveys and Census Data.” Journal of American Statistical Association 70: 5-23.
    Search in Google Scholar
  26. Groves, R.M. and L.E. Lyberg. 2010. “Total Survey Error: Past, Present, and Future.” Public Opinion Quarterly 74: 849-879. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfq065.10.1093/poq/nfq065
    Search in Google Scholar
  27. Hansen, M., W. Hurwitz, and W. Madow. 1953. Sample Survey Methods and Theory, Volumes I and II. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
    Search in Google Scholar
  28. Hansen, M., W. Hurwitz, and L. Pritzker. 1967. Standardization of Procedures for the Evaluation of Data: Measurement Errors and Statistical Standards in the Bureau of the Census. Paper presented at the 36th session of the International Statistical Institute.
    Search in Google Scholar
  29. Imai, M. 1986. Kaisen: the Key to Japan’s Competitive Success. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
    Search in Google Scholar
  30. International Monetary Fund (IMF) 2003. Data Quality Assessment Framework and Data Quality Program. Available at: http://www.imf.org/external/np/sta/dsbb/2003/eng/dqaf.htm (accessed June 21, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  31. International Standards Organization 2006. Market, Opinion and Social Research ISO Standard No. 20252. Available at: www.standards.org/standards/listing/iso_20252 (accessed August 8, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  32. International Standards Organization 2009. Risk Mangement: Principles and Guidelines for Implementation, ISO/DIS 31000 Standard No. 31000. Available at: www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=43170 (accessed August 8, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  33. Journal of Official Statistics 2013. Special Issue on Systems and Architectures for High-Quality Statistics Production, edited by B. Lorenc, I. Jansson, P. Biemer, J. Eltinge, and A. Holmberg, Vol. 1, March, 2013.
    Search in Google Scholar
  34. Juran, J. and B. Godfrey. 1999. Juran’s Quality Handbook. New York: McGraw-Hill.
    Search in Google Scholar
  35. Karsak, E.E. 2004. “Fuzzy Multiple Objective Decision Making Approach to Prioritize Design Requirements in Quality Function Deployment.” International Journal of Production Research 42: 3957-3974.10.1080/00207540410001703998
    Search in Google Scholar
  36. Keeter, S., C. Miller, A. Kohut, R. Groves, and S. Presser. 2000. “Consequences of Reducing Nonresponse in a Large National Telephone Survey.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64: 125-148. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/317759.10.1086/31775910984330
    Search in Google Scholar
  37. Kenett, R.S. and G. Shmueli. 2014. “On Information Quality.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A 177: 3-38. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/rssa.12007.10.1111/rssa.12007
    Search in Google Scholar
  38. Kish, L. 1962. “Studies of Interviewer Variance for Attitudinal Variables.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 57: 92-115. Lequiller, F and D. Blades. 2006. Understanding National Accounts. Paris: OECD 2006. Available at: http://www.eastafritac.org/images/uploads/documents_storage/Understanding_National_Accounts_-_OECD.pdf (accessed June 21, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  39. Lyberg, L. and P. Biemer. 2008. “Quality Assurance and Quality Control in Surveys.” In International Handbook on Survey Methodology, edited by J. Hox, E. de Leeuw, and D. Dillman, 421-441. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
    Search in Google Scholar
  40. Lyberg, L., L. Japec, and P. Biemer. 1998. “Quality Improvement in Surveys - A Process Perspective.” In Proceedings of the Survey Research Methods Section of the American Statistical Association, 23-31.
    Search in Google Scholar
  41. Lyberg, L. 2012. “Survey Quality.” Survey Methodology 38: 107-130.
    Search in Google Scholar
  42. McDavid, J., I. Huse, and L. Hawthorn. 2013. Program Evaluation and Performance Measurement: An Introduction to Practice, Second Edition. New York: Sage Publications.
    Search in Google Scholar
  43. Michalek, J.J., O. Ceryan, P.Y. Papalambros, and Y. Koren. 2006. “Balancing Marketing and Manufacturing Objectives in Product Line Design.” ASME Journal of Mechanical Design 128: 1196-1204. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.2336252.10.1115/1.2336252
    Search in Google Scholar
  44. Merkle, D. and M. Edelman. 2002. “Nonresponse in Exit Polls: A Comprehensive Analysis.” In Survey Nonresponse, edited by R. Groves, D. Dillman, J. Eltinge, and R. Little, 243-257. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
    Search in Google Scholar
  45. Morganstein, D. and D. Marker. 1997. “Continuous Quality Improvement in Statistical Agencies.” In Survey Measurement and Process Quality, edited by L. Lyberg, P. Biemer, M. Collins, E. de Leeuw, C. Dippo, N. Schwarz, and D. Trewin, 475-500. New York: Wiley and Sons.10.1002/9781118490013.ch21
    Search in Google Scholar
  46. Nealon, J. and E. Gleaton. 2013. “Consolidation and Standardization of Survey Operations at a Decentralized Federal Statistical Agency.” Journal of Official Statistic 29: 5-28. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0002.10.2478/jos-2013-0002
    Search in Google Scholar
  47. Neyman, J. 1934. “On the Two Different Aspects of the Representative Method: The Method of Stratified Sampling and the Method of Purposive Selection.” Journal of the Royal Statistical Society 97: 558-606.10.2307/2342192
    Search in Google Scholar
  48. Neyman, J. 1938. Lectures and Conferences on Mathematical Statistics and Probability. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture.
    Search in Google Scholar
  49. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) 2011. Quality Framework and Guidelines for OECD Statistical Activities. Available at: http://search.oecd.org/officialdocuments/displaydocumentpdf/?cote=std/qfs%282011%291&doclanguage= en (accessed June 21, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  50. Office of National Statistics (ONS) 2007. Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality, Version 3.1. Available at: http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/quality/guidelines-for-measuring-statistical-quality/index.html (accessed June 21, 2013).
    Search in Google Scholar
  51. Rossi, P.H., W.M. Lipsey, and H.E. Freeman. 2004. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 7th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.
    Search in Google Scholar
  52. Seyb, A., R. McKenzie, and A. Skerrett. 2013. “Innovative Production Systems at New Zealand: Overcoming the Design and Build Bottleneck.” Journal of Official Statistics 29: 73-97. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0005. 10.2478/jos-2013-0005
    Search in Google Scholar
  53. Statistics Canada 2009. Statistics Canada Quality Guidelines, Fifth Edition. Available at: http://www5.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=12-539-X&CHROPG=1&lang=eng (accessed March 10, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  54. Statistiska centralbyra°n 2001. Quality Definition and Recommendations for Quality Declarations of Official Statistics. Available at: http://www.scb.se/Grupp/Hitta_statistik/Forsta_Statistik/Metod/_Dokument/MIS2001_1.pdf (accessed June 18, 2014).
    Search in Google Scholar
  55. Stephan, F.F. 1948. “History of the Uses of Modern Sampling Procedures.” Journal of the American Statistical Association 43: 12-39.10.1080/01621459.1948.10483247
    Search in Google Scholar
  56. Struijs, P., A. Camstra, R. Renssen, and B. Braaksma. 2013. “Redesign of Statistics Production within an Architectural Framework: The Dutch Experience.” Journal of Official Statistics 29: 49-71. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/jos-2013-0004.10.2478/jos-2013-0004
    Search in Google Scholar
  57. U.S. Bureau of the Census 1974. “Technical Paper 32: Standards for Discussion and Presentation of Errors in Data. U.S. Department of Commerce.” U.S. Government Printing Office, Technical Paper 32, Department of Commerce.
    Search in Google Scholar
  58. U.S. Office of Management and Budget 2002. “Guidelines for Ensuring, and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by Federal Agencies.” Federal Register, 67, 36, February 22.
    Search in Google Scholar
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jos-2014-0022 | Journal eISSN: 2001-7367
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Page range: 381 - 415
Submitted on: Aug 1, 2013
|
Accepted on: Jun 1, 2014
|
Published on: Sep 2, 2014
Published by: Sciendo
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 4 issues per year
Keywords:
Total survey error,
process control,
GDP,
quality indicators,
statistical standards
Related subjects:
Mathematics,
Probability and statistics

© 2014 Paul Biemer, Dennis Trewin, Heather Bergdahl, Lilli Japec, published by Sciendo
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Volume 30 (2014): Issue 3 (September 2014)Next article