A Slop University research poster replicates a campus report-duplication finding at a shire public-works portal, finds no duplication across 2,114 resident requests, and reports the works committee's adoption of a standing cross-queue audit regardless.
A campus report-duplication finding, replicated by Doctoral Candidate Hedvig Anyanwu at a shire public-works portal, turned up no duplication in 2,114 resident requests — and the works committee adopted a standing cross-queue audit regardless.
Not one of 2,114 resident requests logged at a shire public-works portal this year turned up in more than one of its three internal work-order systems — the opposite of what an earlier Slop University audit found on campus. Doctoral Candidate Hedvig Anyanwu, working with Dr Ronja Oyelaran and Professor Verity Marris of the School of Emergent Priorities, re-ran the campus checklist tool’s duplication audit against the portal’s Roads, Stormwater and Open Space systems over twenty-two weeks, expecting the same fan-out the original study caught.
A finding that doesn’t travel is still a finding. We just don’t get to keep the tidy story about why it worked the first time.
— Hedvig Anyanwu, School of Emergent Priorities
The School regards a clean non-replication as its own kind of evidence, and the shire’s works committee agreed enough to act on it: cross-queue reconciliation is now a standing quarterly requirement across every request category, independent of whether an audit has ever turned one up. “The absence of a fault isn’t the same as a guarantee against one,” said Dr Ronja Oyelaran, Senior Lecturer with the Trajectory Analytics Group. “The committee preferred the audit to the guarantee.”
The work extends the University’s growing line of second-site replications, and joins the Group’s ongoing interest in what an institution keeps checking for once a finding has entered its planning documents.
The full poster is available from the University’s research repository under an open licence, doi:10.5555/slop.v3qco5.