Victoria Smy.pdf (192.81 kB)

Informational security: Dis(satisfaction)

Download (192.81 kB)
posted on 15.11.2018 by Victoria Smy
Poster presented at the 2018 Defence and Security Doctoral Symposium.

Objectives: The research conducted aims to determine whether there are common themes and trends emerging from perceptions of information security (Infosec) practices amongst professionals working in defence and security organisations.
Design: A short data capture initiative was implemented in a classroom environment. The initiative served multiple purposes:
1.To act as a taster of qualitative research
2.To provide a [sanitised and cleansed] database for future research students to try out some qualitative data analysis.
3.As an exploratory exploration of Infosec enablers and barriers with a view to understand whether it should form the basis of a new, longitudinal research programme
Methods: This research was granted ethical approval from Cranfield University’s Research Ethics Committee. Initial research was conducted in June 2018.
Participants were military and civilian students undertaking a Research Methods module as part of their Cyber Masters Program (CDIA and CyOPs). There were 34 students in attendance. The sample were predominately male (90%) and aged between 29 and 52 (mean 39 years old). Participants were briefed as to the anonymous nature of the data and the intended data uses. All participation was voluntary and informed consent was sought before data collection. Participants were given 20 minutes (2 x 10) to capture their thoughts as aligned to the following questions:
What are the sources of SATISFACTION with information security within your professional working environment?
What are the sources of DISSATISFACTION with information security within your professional working environment?
Results: Overall, marginally more sources of dissatisfaction (n = 73) than satisfaction (n = 69) with Infosec were reported. Interestingly, a small subset of participants alluded to there being more sources of dissatisfaction but, due to the classified nature of their work, they did not feel able to record them.
The results will be further analysed for common themes, trends and language using NVivo 12 software.
Conclusions: TBC


Authoriser (e.g. PI/supervisor)