Rules as code: Seven levels of digitisation
A guide intended to accelerate sensemaking in discussions involving Rules as Code. Without a common frame of reference, project stakeholders risk talking at cross purposes. Stakeholders contemplating a “digital transformation” project in the legal domain, such as a “Rules as Code” exercise or a RegT...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2020
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/sol_research/3093 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/sol_research/article/5051/viewcontent/Rules_as_Code__7_Levels_of_Digitisation_Pages.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
Summary: | A guide intended to accelerate sensemaking in discussions involving Rules as Code. Without a common frame of reference, project stakeholders risk talking at cross purposes. Stakeholders contemplating a “digital transformation” project in the legal domain, such as a “Rules as Code” exercise or a RegTech / SupTech proof-of-concept, may find this document useful to agree on a common vocabulary to facilitate discussion and planning. To that end, this document classifies “digital transformation” of legal rules into a hierarchy of levels which can be included as terms of reference in planning discussions. While this document is informed by academic discourse, it is intended for practitioners and foregoes the usual citation / footnote style in favour of direct applicability by legal engineers. In the context of work planning, management can say, “we want to build a Level 3.2 RaC prototype”, and the product engineering team would be able to say, “OK, here is roughly the time, resource, and process required for that.” Scope: The legal rules envisaged by this document include relatively black-and-white legislative acts and secondary regulations. They do not include “fuzzier” rules originating in the judiciary, which are often phrased in the form of legal principles and doctrines. Think “your dwelling can have 2.5 storeys of no more than 8 meters in height each”, not “equity must come with clean hands”. |
---|