The IT mishap that recently came to light in Baden-Württemberg has attracted nationwide attention. For years, around 1,440 teaching positions were falsely listed as occupied, although they were actually vacant.
The cause: a data error from 2005, which was caused by a software changeover and was never noticed. The error not only led to incorrect personnel planning, but presumably also to cancelled lessons and unnecessary use of resources.
In addition to the educational policy dimension, the incident also raises a fundamental question: How reliably and transparently is data actually organised and controlled in public administration?
Not ‘just’ an IT problem
What may appear to be a purely technical problem at first glance has a deeper cause: the data was apparently not systematically reconciled, checked or organised for years, either internally or between the ministries involved.
And this is precisely where it becomes clear that data quality is not a purely technical issue, but also an organisational responsibility.
Regulated, transparent data management, as required by the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), for example, could have provided early indications of inconsistencies. The so-called phantom teachers should have been recognised simply by drawing up a processing directory in accordance with Art. 30 GDPR.
According to Art. 5 of the GDPR, every data controller is obliged to ensure that personal data is accurate and up to date. This principle also applies to public bodies such as ministries and schools, not only for data protection reasons, but also for organisational and budgetary reasons.
A functioning data protection and data management organisation with defined processes for monitoring, reconciliation and communication between authorities would presumably have helped to detect the incorrect calculation of posts earlier. The mishap thus also reveals a weakness in the overarching control and data responsibility.
A look ahead
The digitalisation of public administration is a declared goal of many federal states - including Baden-Württemberg. However, this case shows once again that technology alone is not enough. It also requires clear processes, responsibilities and regular quality assurance in data processing.
In this context, the GDPR can be more than just a legal framework: It offers structural guidelines for modern and even comprehensible data management that not only protects individual rights, but also supports the integrity and efficiency of the respective actions.
Data protection, transparency and a clean database are not only part of modern administration, but are also a decisive building block for trust and quality in the respective processes.