Digital Information Governance in Australian Corporate Secretarial Practice: A Case Study

Thesis Abstract

Digital information governance (DIG) has become central to the effectiveness and compliance of corporate secretarial functions in Australia, where increasing regulatory complexity and digital practice expectations challenge traditional record-keeping, risk management, and stakeholder accountability. This study addresses the problem that Australian corporate secretariats struggle to integrate DIG capabilities—such as metadata standardization, secure electronic filing, version control, and audit trails—within existing governance, risk, and compliance (GRC) frameworks, potentially undermining transparency, decision-making, and regulatory compliance. The aim is to develop an empirically grounded understanding of how Australian-listed companies implement digital information governance within secretarial practice, and to identify determinants of successful DIG adoption and its impact on governance outcomes. Specific objectives are (1) map current DIG practices and maturity levels across Australian corporate secretariats; (2) examine the relationship between DIG maturity and key governance outcomes (compliance effectiveness, information security, and board access to verifiable records); (3) identify barriers and enablers of DIG implementation through stakeholder perspectives; (4) test the applicability of information governance theories—specifically the Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM) and Diffusion of Innovations (DOI)—to secretarial contexts; and (5) propose a practical framework for advancing DIG in Australian corporate secretarial practice. The methodology adopts a mixed-methods case study design, combining quantitative survey data with qualitative interview insights to provide depth and generalizability. The population comprises Australian-listed companies across sectors with established secretarial functions and formal CAMS (Corporate Administrative and Management Systems). A stratified random sample of 120 companies will be surveyed, with 96 usable responses anticipated to achieve a 80% power to detect moderate effects (Cohen’s f = 0.25) at ? = 0.05. In-depth semi-structured interviews will be conducted with 24 senior secretaries, general counsels, and information governance officers to capture nuanced perspectives on DIG implementation, policy alignment, and risk management. Data collection instruments include a DIG Maturity Audit instrument adapted from established information governance benchmarks and a governance outcomes questionnaire, both piloted for reliability (Cronbach’s alpha > 0.70). Qualitative data will be analyzed using thematic analysis aligned with Braun and Clarke’s approach, supported by NVivo coding. Quantitative analysis will employ multiple regression to test the relationship between DIG maturity (independent variable) and governance outcomes (dependent variables compliance effectiveness, information security incidents, and quality of board information), alongside structural equation modeling (SEM) to assess the mediating role of organizational readiness and leadership support. The study will also apply the Information Governance Reference Model (IGRM) and Diffusion of Innovations (DOI) theory to interpret findings and map pathways of DIG adoption within corporate secretarial ecosystems. Expected findings indicate that higher DIG maturity correlates with reduced regulatory risk, fewer information security incidents, and improved board access to auditable records, with organizational readiness, C-suite sponsorship, and standardized metadata practices emerging as key mediators. Variation is anticipated across sectors and firm sizes, with larger, globally integrated entities reporting more advanced DIG implementations. The research is expected to reveal specific gaps in metadata quality, retention schedules, and cross-system interoperability that impede end-to-end digital governance, and to identify effective change-management strategies for secretarial teams, including targeted training, policy alignment, and governance-aligned KPI frameworks. Contributions to knowledge include (1) an empirical understanding of DIG implementation within Australian corporate secretarial practice, (2) validation and extension of the IGRM and DOI in a secretarial context, (3) a validated DIG Maturity framework tailored to Australian listed companies, and (4) a practical implementation framework outlining steps for enhancing metadata standards, secure digital filing, and traceable audit trails. The study concludes that robust DIG is a strategic governance asset rather than a purely IT function and recommends governance-enabled digitization roadmaps, cross-functional governance committees, and routine audits of digital records’ integrity. Policy implications emphasize mandatory metadata standards, periodic DIG maturity assessments, and enhanced disclosure of governance information system controls in annual reporting.