In cryptography, the branch number is a numerical value that characterizes the amount of diffusion introduced by a vectorial Boolean function F that maps an input vector a to output vector F ( a ) {\displaystyle F(a)} . For the (usual) case of a linear F the value of the differential branch number is produced by: applying nonzero values of a (i.e., values that have at least one non-zero component of the vector) to the input of F; calculating for each input value a the Hamming weight W {\displaystyle W} (number of nonzero components), and adding weights W ( a ) {\displaystyle W(a)} and W ( F ( a ) ) {\displaystyle W(F(a))} together; selecting the smallest combined weight across for all nonzero input values: B d ( F ) = min a ≠ 0 ( W ( a ) + W ( F ( a ) ) ) {\displaystyle B_{d}(F)={\underset {a\neq 0}{\min }}(W(a)+W(F(a)))} . If both a and F ( a ) {\displaystyle F(a)} have s components, the result is obviously limited on the high side by the value s + 1 {\displaystyle s+1} (this "perfect" result is achieved when any single nonzero component in a makes all components of F ( a ) {\displaystyle F(a)} to be non-zero). A high branch number suggests higher resistance to the differential cryptanalysis: the small variations of input will produce large changes on the output and in order to obtain small variations of the output, large changes of the input value will be required. The term was introduced by Daemen and Rijmen in early 2000s and quickly became a typical tool to assess the diffusion properties of the transformations. == Mathematics == The branch number concept is not limited to the linear transformations, Daemen and Rijmen provided two general metrics: differential branch number, where the minimum is obtained over inputs of F that are constructed by independently sweeping all the values of two nonzero and unequal vectors a, b ( ⊕ {\displaystyle \oplus } is a component-by-component exclusive-or): B d ( F ) = min a ≠ b ( W ( a ⊕ b ) + W ( F ( a ) ⊕ F ( b ) ) {\displaystyle B_{d}(F)={\underset {a\neq b}{\min }}(W(a\oplus b)+W(F(a)\oplus F(b))} ; for linear branch number, the independent candidates α {\displaystyle \alpha } and β {\displaystyle \beta } are independently swept; they should be nonzero and correlated with respect to F (the L A T ( α , β ) {\displaystyle LAT(\alpha ,\beta )} coefficient of the linear approximation table of F should be nonzero): B l ( F ) = min α ≠ 0 , β , L A T ( α , β ) ≠ 0 ( W ( α ) + W ( β ) ) {\displaystyle B_{l}(F)={\underset {\alpha \neq 0,\beta ,LAT(\alpha ,\beta )\neq 0}{\min }}(W(\alpha )+W(\beta ))} .
Insider threat
An insider threat is a perceived threat to an organization that comes from people within the organization, such as employees, former employees, contractors or business associates, who have inside information concerning the organization's security practices, data and computer systems. The threat may involve fraud, the theft of confidential or commercially valuable information, the theft of intellectual property, or the sabotage of computer systems. == Overview == Insiders may have accounts giving them legitimate access to computer systems, with this access originally having been given to them to serve in the performance of their duties; these permissions could be abused to harm the organization. Insiders are often familiar with the organization's data and intellectual property as well as the methods that are in place to protect them. This makes it easier for the insider to circumvent any security controls of which they are aware. Physical proximity to data means that the insider does not need to hack into the organizational network through the outer perimeter by traversing firewalls; rather they are in the building already, often with direct access to the organization's internal network. Insider threats are harder to defend against than attacks from outsiders, since the insider already has legitimate access to the organization's information and assets. An insider may attempt to steal property or information for personal gain or to benefit another organization or country. The threat to the organization could also be through malicious software left running on its computer systems by former employees, a so-called logic bomb. == Research == Insider threat is an active area of research in academia and government. The CERT Coordination Center at Carnegie-Mellon University maintains the CERT Insider Threat Center, which includes a database of more than 850 cases of insider threats, including instances of fraud, theft and sabotage; the database is used for research and analysis. CERT's Insider Threat Team also maintains an informational blog to help organizations and businesses defend themselves against insider crime. The Threat Lab and Defense Personnel and Security Research Center (DOD PERSEREC) has also recently emerged as a national resource within the United States of America. The Threat Lab hosts an annual conference, the SBS Summit. They also maintain a website that contains resources from this conference. Complimenting these efforts, a companion podcast was created, Voices from the SBS Summit. In 2022, the Threat Lab created an interdisciplinary journal, Counter Insider Threat Research and Practice (CITRAP) which publishes research on insider threat detection. === Findings === In the 2022 Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR), Verizon found that 82% of breaches involved the human element, noting that employees continue to play a leading role in cybersecurity incidents and breaches. According to the UK Information Commissioners Office, 90% of all breaches reported to them in 2019 were the result of mistakes made by end users. This was up from 61% and 87% over the previous two years. A 2018 whitepaper reported that 53% of companies surveyed had confirmed insider attacks against their organization in the previous 12 months, with 27% saying insider attacks have become more frequent. A report published in July 2012 on the insider threat in the U.S. financial sector gives some statistics on insider threat incidents: 80% of the malicious acts were committed at work during working hours; 81% of the perpetrators planned their actions beforehand; 33% of the perpetrators were described as "difficult" and 17% as being "disgruntled". The insider was identified in 74% of cases. Financial gain was a motive in 81% of cases, revenge in 23% of cases, and 27% of the people carrying out malicious acts were in financial difficulties at the time. The US Department of Defense Personnel Security Research Center published a report that describes approaches for detecting insider threats. Earlier it published ten case studies of insider attacks by information technology professionals. Cybersecurity experts believe that 38% of negligent insiders are victims of a phishing attack, whereby they receive an email that appears to come from a legitimate source such as a company. These emails normally contain malware in the form of hyperlinks. == Typologies and ontologies == Multiple classification systems and ontologies have been proposed to classify insider threats. Traditional models of insider threat identify three broad categories: Malicious insiders, which are people who take advantage of their access to inflict harm on an organization; Negligent insiders, which are people who make errors and disregard policies, which place their organizations at risk; and Infiltrators, who are external actors that obtain legitimate access credentials without authorization. == Criticisms == Insider threat research has been criticized. Critics have argued that insider threat is a poorly defined concept. Forensically investigating insider data theft is notoriously difficult, and requires novel techniques such as stochastic forensics. Data supporting insider threat is generally proprietary (i.e., encrypted data). Theoretical/conceptual models of insider threat are often based on loose interpretations of research in the behavioral and social sciences, using "deductive principles and intuitions of subject matter expert." Adopting sociotechnical approaches, researchers have also argued for the need to consider insider threat from the perspective of social systems. Jordan Schoenherr said that "surveillance requires an understanding of how sanctioning systems are framed, how employees will respond to surveillance, what workplace norms are deemed relevant, and what ‘deviance’ means, e.g., deviation for a justified organization norm or failure to conform to an organizational norm that conflicts with general social values." By treating all employees as potential insider threats, organizations might create conditions that lead to insider threats. == Sector-specific concerns == === Healthcare === The healthcare industry faces particularly acute insider threat risks due to the large number of workforce members who require access to sensitive patient records for legitimate clinical purposes. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has identified unauthorized access by insiders, including workforce snooping on patient records and theft of protected health information for identity fraud, as a persistent enforcement concern. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) Security Rule addresses insider threats through several administrative safeguards, including workforce security procedures requiring covered entities to implement policies for authorizing and supervising workforce members who work with electronic protected health information, as well as termination procedures to revoke access when employment ends (45 CFR 164.308(a)(3)). The rule also requires audit controls to record and examine information system activity (45 CFR 164.312(b)), enabling detection of unauthorized access by insiders. The December 2024 Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) to overhaul the HIPAA Security Rule would strengthen insider threat defenses by mandating role-based access controls, requiring notification of relevant workforce members within 24 hours of any changes to access privileges, and requiring regular review of audit logs to detect anomalous access patterns.
WYSIWYS
In cryptography, What You See Is What You Sign (WYSIWYS) is a property of digital signature systems that ensures the semantic content of signed messages can not be changed, either by accident or intent. == Mechanism of WYSIWYS == When digitally signing a document, the integrity of the signature relies not just on the soundness of the digital signature algorithms that are used, but also on the security of the computing platform used to sign the document. The WYSIWYS property of digital signature systems aims to tackle this problem by defining a desirable property that the visual representation of a digital document should be consistent across computing systems, particularly at the points of digital signature and digital signature verification. It is relatively easy to change the interpretation of a digital document by implementing changes on the computer system where the document is being processed, and the greater the semantic distance, the easier it gets. From a semantic perspective this creates uncertainty about what exactly has been signed. WYSIWYS is a property of a digital signature system that ensures that the semantic interpretation of a digitally signed message cannot be changed, either by accident or by intent. This property also ensures that a digital document to be signed can not contain hidden semantic content that can be revealed after the signature has been applied. Though a WYSIWYS implementation is only as secure as the computing platform it is running on, various methods have been proposed to make WYSIWYS more robust. The term WYSIWYS was coined by Peter Landrock and Torben Pedersen to describe some of the principles in delivering secure and legally binding digital signatures for Pan-European projects.
Dashboard (computing)
In computer information systems, a dashboard is a type of graphical user interface which often provides at-a-glance views of data relevant to a particular objective or process through a combination of visualizations and summary information. In other usage, "dashboard" is another name for "progress report" or "report" and is considered a form of data visualization. The dashboard is often accessible by a web browser and is typically linked to regularly updating data sources. Dashboards are often interactive and facilitate users to explore the data themselves, usually by clicking into elements to view more detailed information. The term dashboard originates from the automobile dashboard where drivers monitor the major functions at a glance via the instrument panel. == History == The idea of digital dashboards followed the study of decision support systems in the 1970s. Early predecessors of the modern business dashboard were first developed in the 1980s in the form of Executive Information Systems (EISs). Due to problems primarily with data refreshing and handling, it was soon realized that the approach wasn't practical as information was often incomplete, unreliable, and spread across too many disparate sources. Thus, EISs hibernated until the 1990s when the information age quickened pace and data warehousing, and online analytical processing (OLAP) allowed dashboards to function adequately. Despite the availability of enabling technologies, the dashboard use didn't become popular until later in that decade, with the rise of key performance indicators (KPIs), and the introduction of Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton's balanced scorecard. In the late 1990s, Microsoft promoted a concept known as the Digital Nervous System and "digital dashboards" were described as being one leg of that concept. Today, the use of dashboards forms an important part of Business Performance Management (BPM). Initially dashboards were used for monitoring purposes, now with the advancement of technology, dashboards are being used for more analytical purposes. The use of dashboards has now been incorporating; scenario analysis, drill down capabilities, and presentation format flexibility. == Benefits == Digital dashboards allow managers to monitor the contribution of the various departments in their organization. In addition, they enable “rolling up” of information to present a consolidated view across an organization. To gauge exactly how well an organization is performing overall, digital dashboards allow you to capture and report specific data points from each department within the organization, thus providing a "snapshot" of performance. Benefits of using digital dashboards include: Visual presentation of performance measures Ability to identify and correct negative trends Measure efficiencies/inefficiencies Ability to generate detailed reports showing new trends Ability to make more informed decisions based on collected business intelligence Dashboards offers a holistic view of the entire business as it gives the manager a bird's eye view into the performance of sales, data inventory, web traffic, social media analytics and other associated data that is visually presented on a single dashboard. Dashboards lead to better management of marketing/financial strategies as a dashboard for the display of marketing data makes the process of marketing easier and more reliable as compared to doing it manually. Web analytics play a crucial role in shaping the marketing strategy of many businesses. Dashboards also facilitate for better tracking of sales and financial reporting as the data is more precise and in one area. Lastly, dashboards offer for better customer service through monitoring because they keep both the managers and the clients updated on the project progress through automated emails and notifications. == Align strategies and organizational goals == Gain total visibility of all systems instantly Quick identification of data outliers and correlations Consolidated reporting into one location Available on mobile devices to quickly access metrics == Classification == Dashboards can be broken down according to role and are either strategic, analytical, operational, or informational. Dashboards are the 3rd step on the information ladder, demonstrating the conversion of data to increasingly valuable insights. Strategic dashboards support managers at any level in an organization and provide the quick overview that decision-makers need to monitor the health and opportunities of the business. Dashboards of this type focus on high-level measures of performance and forecasts. Strategic dashboards benefit from static snapshots of data (daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly) that are not constantly changing from one moment to the next. Dashboards for analytical purposes often include more context, comparisons, and history, along with subtler performance evaluators. In addition, analytical dashboards typically support interactions with the data, such as drilling down into the underlying details. Dashboards for monitoring operations are often designed differently from those that support strategic decision making or data analysis and often require monitoring of activities and events that are constantly changing and might require attention and response at a moment's notice. == Types of dashboards == Digital dashboards may be laid out to track the flows inherent in the business processes that they monitor. Graphically, users may see the high-level processes and then drill down into low-level data. This level of detail is often buried deep within the corporate enterprise and otherwise unavailable to the senior executives. Three main types of digital dashboards dominate the market today: desktop software applications, web-browser-based applications, and desktop applications are also known as desktop widgets. The last are driven by a widget engine. Both Desktop and Browser-based providers enable the distribution of dashboards via a web browser. An example of the latter is web-based-browser Asana, which helps teams orchestrate their work, from daily tasks to strategic cross-functional initiatives. With it, teams can manage everything from company objectives to digital transformation to product launches and marketing campaigns. Specialized dashboards may track all corporate functions. Examples include human resources, recruiting, sales, operations, security, information technology, project management, customer relationship management, digital marketing and many more departmental dashboards. For a smaller organization like a startup a compact startup scorecard dashboard tracks important activities across lot of domains ranging from social media to sales. Digital dashboard projects involve business units as the driver and the information technology department as the enabler. Therefore, the success of dashboard projects depends on the relevancy/importance of information provided within the dashboard. This includes the metrics chosen to monitor and the timeliness of the data forming those metrics; data must be up to date and accurate. Key performance indicators, balanced scorecards, and sales performance figures are some of the content appropriate on business dashboards. === Performance Dashboards === Dashboards involve the combination of visual and functional features. This combination of features helps improve cognition and interpretation. A performance dashboard sits at the intersection of two powerful disciplines: business intelligence and performance management. Therefore, there are different users who could use these dashboards for different reasons. For example, a level of workers could look at monitoring inventory while those in more managerial roles can look at lagging measure. Then executives could utilize the dashboard to evaluate strategic performance against objectives. == Dashboards and scorecards == Balanced scorecards and dashboards have been linked together as if they were interchangeable. However, although both visually display critical information, the difference is in the format: Scorecards can open the quality of an operation while dashboards provide calculated direction. A balanced scorecard has what they called a "prescriptive" format. It should always contain these components: Perspectives – group Objectives – verb-noun phrases pulled from a strategy plan Measures – also called metric or key performance indicators (KPIs) Spotlight indicators – red, yellow, or green symbols that provide an at-a-glance view of a measure's performance. Each of these sections ensures that a Balanced Scorecard is essentially connected to the businesses critical strategic needs. The design of a dashboard is more loosely defined. Dashboards are usually a series of graphics, charts, gauges and other visual indicators that can be monitored and interpreted. Even when there is a strategic link, on a dashboard, it may not be noticed as such since objectives are not normally pre
Coreu
COREU (French: Correspondance Européenne – Telex network of European correspondents, also EUKOR-Netzwerk in Austria) is a communication network of the European Union for the communication of the Council of the European Union, the European correspondents of the foreign ministries of the EU member states, permanent representatives of member states in Brussels, the European Commission, and the General Secretariat of the Council of the European Union. The European Parliament is not among the participants. COREU is the European equivalent of the American Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet, also known as Intelink-S). COREU's official aim is fast communication in case of crisis. The network enables a closer cooperation in matters regarding foreign affairs. In actuality the system's function exceeds that of mere communication, it also enables decision-making. COREU's first goal is to enable the exchange of information before and after decisions. Relaying upfront negotiations in preparation of meetings is the second goal. In addition, the system also allows the editing of documents and the decision-making, especially if there is little time. While the first two goals are preparatory measures for a shared foreign policy, the third is a methodical variant marked by practise that is defining for the image of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. == Members == (The following information dates from 2013): There is one representative in each of the capital cities in the EU.(since 1973) In Germany for example, this is the European correspondent (EU-KOR) from the Foreign Office. In Austria it is the European correspondent from the Referat II.1.a in the Federal Ministry for Europe, Integration and Foreign Affairs They are the correspondents (since 1982) for the European Commission They comprise the secretariat for the European Council They also make up the European External Action Service (EEAS) (responsible for foreign policy issues, since 1987) == Data volume and technical details == COREU functions as a spoke-hub distribution paradigm system with the hub in Brussels. The network is operated by the European Union Intelligence and Situation Centre (formerly Joint Situation Center, JSC). The technical infrastructure is located in a building of the European Council. COREU may be described as an advanced telex system with encrypted messages via dedicated terminals. Once a message has reached the destination, it is then redistributed via the local media. In contrast, messages of governments are transmitted via local media to the correspondents and from there delivered point-to-point to Brussels via COREU. In 2010, approximately 8500 communications had been distributed over this network. == History == A telex-based communication system under the name COREU was established in 1973. Originally, only the ministries of Foreign Affairs in the European capitals were connected to it. This telex system was replaced in 1997 by the mail system CORTESY (COREU Terminal Equipment System). The name was retained despite the technical innovation. COREU was reportedly compromised by hackers working for the People's Liberation Army Strategic Support Force, allowing for the theft of thousands of low-classified documents and diplomatic cables.
Software design
Software design is the process of conceptualizing how a software system will work before it is implemented or modified. Software design also refers to the direct result of the design process – the concepts of how the software will work which may be formally documented or may be maintained less formally, including via oral tradition. The design process enables a designer to model aspects of a software system before it exists with the intent of making the effort of writing the code more efficiently. Creativity, past experience, a sense of what makes "good" software, and a commitment to quality are success factors for a competent design. A software design can be compared to an architected plan for a house. High-level plans represent the totality of the house (e.g., a three-dimensional rendering of the house). Lower-level plans provide guidance for constructing each detail (e.g., the plumbing lay). Similarly, the software design model provides a variety of views of the proposed software solution. == Part of the overall process == In terms of the waterfall development process, software design is the activity that occurs after requirements analysis and before coding. Requirements analysis determines what the system needs to do without determining how it will do it, and thus, multiple designs can be imagined that satisfy the requirements. The design can be created while coding, without a plan or requirements analysis, but for more complex projects this is less feasible. Completing a design prior to coding allows for multidisciplinary designers and subject-matter experts to collaborate with programmers to produce software that is useful and technically sound. Sometimes, a simulation or prototype is created to model the system in an effort to determine a valid and good design. == Code as design == A common point of confusion with the term design in software is that the process applies at multiple levels of abstraction such as a high-level software architecture and lower-level components, functions and algorithms. A relatively formal process may occur at high levels of abstraction but at lower levels, the design process is almost always less formal where the only artifact of design may be the code itself. To the extent that this is true, software design refers to the design of the design. Edsger W. Dijkstra referred to this layering of semantic levels as the "radical novelty" of computer programming, and Donald Knuth used his experience writing TeX to describe the futility of attempting to design a program prior to implementing it: TEX would have been a complete failure if I had merely specified it and not participated fully in its initial implementation. The process of implementation constantly led me to unanticipated questions and to new insights about how the original specifications could be improved. == Artifacts == A design process may include the production of art Software design documentation such as flow chart, use case, Pseudocode, Unified Modeling Language model and other Fundamental modeling concepts. For user centered software, design may involve user experience design yielding a storyboard to help determine those specifications. Documentation may be reviewed to allow constraints, specifications and even requirements to be adjusted prior to coding. == Iterative design == Software systems inherently deal with uncertainties, and the size of software components can significantly influence a system's outcomes, both positively and negatively. Neal Ford and Mark Richards propose an iterative approach to address the challenge of identifying and right-sizing components. This method emphasizes continuous refinement as teams develop a more nuanced understanding of system behavior and requirements. The approach typically involves a cycle with several stages: A high-level partitioning strategy is established, often categorized as technical or domain-based. Guidelines for the smallest meaningful deployable unit, referred to as "quanta," are defined. While these foundational decisions are made early, they may be revisited later in the cycle if necessary. Initial components are identified based on the established strategy. Requirements are assigned to the identified components. The roles and responsibilities of each component are analyzed to ensure clarity and minimize overlap. Architectural characteristics, such as scalability, fault tolerance, and maintainability, are evaluated. Components may be restructured based on feedback from development teams. This cycle serves as a general framework and can be adapted to different domains. == Design principles == Design principles enable a software engineer to navigate the design process. Davis suggested principles which have been refined over time as: The design process should not suffer from "tunnel vision" A good designer should consider alternative approaches, judging each based on the requirements of the problem, the resources available to do the job. The design should be traceable to the analysis model Because a single element of the design model can often be traced back to multiple requirements, it is necessary to have a means for tracking how requirements have been satisfied by the design model. The design should not reinvent the wheel Systems are constructed using a set of design patterns, many of which have likely been encountered before. These patterns should always be chosen as an alternative to reinvention. Time is short and resources are limited; design time should be invested in representing (truly new) ideas by integrating patterns that already exist (when applicable). The design should "minimize the intellectual distance" between the software and the problem as it exists in the real world That is, the structure of the software design should, whenever possible, mimic the structure of the problem domain. The design should exhibit uniformity and integration A design is uniform if it appears fully coherent. In order to achieve this outcome, rules of style and format should be defined for a design team before design work begins. A design is integrated if care is taken in defining interfaces between design components. The design should be structured to accommodate change The design concepts discussed in the next section enable a design to achieve this principle. The design should be structured to degrade gently, even when aberrant data, events, or operating conditions are encountered Well-designed software should never "bomb"; it should be designed to accommodate unusual circumstances, and if it must terminate processing, it should do so in a graceful manner. Design is not coding, coding is not design Even when detailed procedural designs are created for program components, the level of abstraction of the design model is higher than the source code. The only design decisions made at the coding level should address the small implementation details that enable the procedural design to be coded. The design should be assessed for quality as it is being created, not after the fact A variety of design concepts and design measures are available to assist the designer in assessing quality throughout the development process. The design should be reviewed to minimize conceptual (semantic) errors There is sometimes a tendency to focus on minutiae when the design is reviewed, missing the forest for the trees. A design team should ensure that major conceptual elements of the design (omissions, ambiguity, inconsistency) have been addressed before worrying about the syntax of the design model. == Design concepts == Design concepts provide a designer with a foundation from which more sophisticated methods can be applied. Design concepts include: Abstraction Reducing the information content of a concept or an observable phenomenon, typically to retain only information that is relevant for a particular purpose. It is an act of Representing essential features without including the background details or explanations. Architecture The overall structure of the software and the ways in which that structure provides conceptual integrity for a system. Good software architecture will yield a good return on investment with respect to the desired outcome of the project, e.g. in terms of performance, quality, schedule and cost. Control hierarchy A program structure that represents the organization of a program component and implies a hierarchy of control. Data structure Representing the logical relationship between elements of data. Design pattern A designer may identify a design aspect of the system that has solved in the past. The reuse of such patterns can increase software development velocity. Information hiding Modules should be specified and designed so that information contained within a module is inaccessible to other modules that have no need for such information. Modularity Dividing the solution into parts (modules). Refinement The process of elaboration. A hierarchy is developed by decomposing a macrosco
Dashboard (computing)
In computer information systems, a dashboard is a type of graphical user interface which often provides at-a-glance views of data relevant to a particular objective or process through a combination of visualizations and summary information. In other usage, "dashboard" is another name for "progress report" or "report" and is considered a form of data visualization. The dashboard is often accessible by a web browser and is typically linked to regularly updating data sources. Dashboards are often interactive and facilitate users to explore the data themselves, usually by clicking into elements to view more detailed information. The term dashboard originates from the automobile dashboard where drivers monitor the major functions at a glance via the instrument panel. == History == The idea of digital dashboards followed the study of decision support systems in the 1970s. Early predecessors of the modern business dashboard were first developed in the 1980s in the form of Executive Information Systems (EISs). Due to problems primarily with data refreshing and handling, it was soon realized that the approach wasn't practical as information was often incomplete, unreliable, and spread across too many disparate sources. Thus, EISs hibernated until the 1990s when the information age quickened pace and data warehousing, and online analytical processing (OLAP) allowed dashboards to function adequately. Despite the availability of enabling technologies, the dashboard use didn't become popular until later in that decade, with the rise of key performance indicators (KPIs), and the introduction of Robert S. Kaplan and David P. Norton's balanced scorecard. In the late 1990s, Microsoft promoted a concept known as the Digital Nervous System and "digital dashboards" were described as being one leg of that concept. Today, the use of dashboards forms an important part of Business Performance Management (BPM). Initially dashboards were used for monitoring purposes, now with the advancement of technology, dashboards are being used for more analytical purposes. The use of dashboards has now been incorporating; scenario analysis, drill down capabilities, and presentation format flexibility. == Benefits == Digital dashboards allow managers to monitor the contribution of the various departments in their organization. In addition, they enable “rolling up” of information to present a consolidated view across an organization. To gauge exactly how well an organization is performing overall, digital dashboards allow you to capture and report specific data points from each department within the organization, thus providing a "snapshot" of performance. Benefits of using digital dashboards include: Visual presentation of performance measures Ability to identify and correct negative trends Measure efficiencies/inefficiencies Ability to generate detailed reports showing new trends Ability to make more informed decisions based on collected business intelligence Dashboards offers a holistic view of the entire business as it gives the manager a bird's eye view into the performance of sales, data inventory, web traffic, social media analytics and other associated data that is visually presented on a single dashboard. Dashboards lead to better management of marketing/financial strategies as a dashboard for the display of marketing data makes the process of marketing easier and more reliable as compared to doing it manually. Web analytics play a crucial role in shaping the marketing strategy of many businesses. Dashboards also facilitate for better tracking of sales and financial reporting as the data is more precise and in one area. Lastly, dashboards offer for better customer service through monitoring because they keep both the managers and the clients updated on the project progress through automated emails and notifications. == Align strategies and organizational goals == Gain total visibility of all systems instantly Quick identification of data outliers and correlations Consolidated reporting into one location Available on mobile devices to quickly access metrics == Classification == Dashboards can be broken down according to role and are either strategic, analytical, operational, or informational. Dashboards are the 3rd step on the information ladder, demonstrating the conversion of data to increasingly valuable insights. Strategic dashboards support managers at any level in an organization and provide the quick overview that decision-makers need to monitor the health and opportunities of the business. Dashboards of this type focus on high-level measures of performance and forecasts. Strategic dashboards benefit from static snapshots of data (daily, weekly, monthly, and quarterly) that are not constantly changing from one moment to the next. Dashboards for analytical purposes often include more context, comparisons, and history, along with subtler performance evaluators. In addition, analytical dashboards typically support interactions with the data, such as drilling down into the underlying details. Dashboards for monitoring operations are often designed differently from those that support strategic decision making or data analysis and often require monitoring of activities and events that are constantly changing and might require attention and response at a moment's notice. == Types of dashboards == Digital dashboards may be laid out to track the flows inherent in the business processes that they monitor. Graphically, users may see the high-level processes and then drill down into low-level data. This level of detail is often buried deep within the corporate enterprise and otherwise unavailable to the senior executives. Three main types of digital dashboards dominate the market today: desktop software applications, web-browser-based applications, and desktop applications are also known as desktop widgets. The last are driven by a widget engine. Both Desktop and Browser-based providers enable the distribution of dashboards via a web browser. An example of the latter is web-based-browser Asana, which helps teams orchestrate their work, from daily tasks to strategic cross-functional initiatives. With it, teams can manage everything from company objectives to digital transformation to product launches and marketing campaigns. Specialized dashboards may track all corporate functions. Examples include human resources, recruiting, sales, operations, security, information technology, project management, customer relationship management, digital marketing and many more departmental dashboards. For a smaller organization like a startup a compact startup scorecard dashboard tracks important activities across lot of domains ranging from social media to sales. Digital dashboard projects involve business units as the driver and the information technology department as the enabler. Therefore, the success of dashboard projects depends on the relevancy/importance of information provided within the dashboard. This includes the metrics chosen to monitor and the timeliness of the data forming those metrics; data must be up to date and accurate. Key performance indicators, balanced scorecards, and sales performance figures are some of the content appropriate on business dashboards. === Performance Dashboards === Dashboards involve the combination of visual and functional features. This combination of features helps improve cognition and interpretation. A performance dashboard sits at the intersection of two powerful disciplines: business intelligence and performance management. Therefore, there are different users who could use these dashboards for different reasons. For example, a level of workers could look at monitoring inventory while those in more managerial roles can look at lagging measure. Then executives could utilize the dashboard to evaluate strategic performance against objectives. == Dashboards and scorecards == Balanced scorecards and dashboards have been linked together as if they were interchangeable. However, although both visually display critical information, the difference is in the format: Scorecards can open the quality of an operation while dashboards provide calculated direction. A balanced scorecard has what they called a "prescriptive" format. It should always contain these components: Perspectives – group Objectives – verb-noun phrases pulled from a strategy plan Measures – also called metric or key performance indicators (KPIs) Spotlight indicators – red, yellow, or green symbols that provide an at-a-glance view of a measure's performance. Each of these sections ensures that a Balanced Scorecard is essentially connected to the businesses critical strategic needs. The design of a dashboard is more loosely defined. Dashboards are usually a series of graphics, charts, gauges and other visual indicators that can be monitored and interpreted. Even when there is a strategic link, on a dashboard, it may not be noticed as such since objectives are not normally pre