Source assessmentContext only
Governance models for robotic process automation: The case of Nordea Bank
Robotic process automation governanceAcademic
Assessment outcome
total 1/4 (actionability 0 + authority 1); currency unscored, so pro-rated to 1.5/6
Total1/6
Actionability0/2
Authority1/2
Currency—
Authorship & scope
Attribution (G4 evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuer authority (evidence)
No evidence recorded for this source.
Issuers, who it governs, legal force and content are on the full record.
Eligibility gates
G1 · Retrievablepass
Passed in screening.
G2 · AI nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G3 · Governance nexuspass
Passed in screening.
G4 · Attributablepass
Passed in screening.
G5 · In forcepass
Passed in screening.
Scored criteria
Actionability
0/2No rationale recorded.
Students who have worked through the case should be able to (1) describe archetypal and hybrid governance modes for robotic process automation and (2) evaluate their advantages and disadvantages for solid infrastructure and effective software development and maintenance.
Authority
1/2No rationale recorded.
Journal of Information Technology Teaching Cases, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 20-29
Currency
—No rationale recorded.
Classification
Coverage topicRobotic process automation governance
PerspectiveAcademic
Lifecycle stageN/A cross-cutting
Layermodel
GranularityNot recorded