The principles, standards, and processes governing how the ELDR Institute conducts, reviews, and publishes research — and what it owes readers when it gets something wrong.
Institutional authority is not self-conferred. It is earned through a sustained record of accurate, independent, accountable research — and it is destroyed, quickly and permanently, by research that is inaccurate, conflicted, or unaccountable. This charter exists to make ELDR Institute research accountable to standards that readers can verify, not merely principles that the Institute asserts.
The standards described here are not aspirational. They are operational. Every Institute publication is subject to them. Fellows are expected to know them. The Research Advisory Board enforces them.
The ELDR Institute operates as a research division of ELDR Group but maintains editorial independence from ELDR Group's commercial practices. Research publications are not commissioned by or on behalf of clients, and no client or commercial relationship influences the findings, conclusions, or recommendations of Institute publications. Research Fellows and Senior Fellows are credited as principal authors on publications bearing their names; they are accountable for the accuracy, methodology, and intellectual integrity of those publications regardless of any other professional relationship.
Institute research is not marketing. It does not promote ELDR services. It does not endorse specific vendors, products, or platforms. Where commercial services are relevant to research findings, they are referenced without promotional framing. Where an Institute Fellow has a material relationship with a subject matter addressed in a publication, that relationship is disclosed in the publication.
ELDR Institute publications are classified by evidence type, because the evidentiary basis of a research claim determines how much confidence it warrants. The Institute uses four evidence classifications:
Evidence classifications:
— Primary Research: Original data collection, practitioner surveys, case evidence gathered directly by the Institute or its Fellows
— Practitioner-Based Research: Findings grounded in documented practitioner experience and operational engagement, appropriately attributed
— Secondary Research: Analysis of publicly available regulatory documents, framework publications, academic papers, and industry reports
— Analytical Framework: Structured methodological frameworks derived from practitioner expertise, where empirical data is supplemented by professional judgment
Every publication states its evidence classification in the metadata. Readers are expected to weight conclusions accordingly.
Research publications at the ELDR Institute undergo peer review prior to publication. The peer review process is as follows:
Step 1 — Internal Review: The assigned Senior Fellow reviews the draft for accuracy, methodology, and consistency with prior Institute publications.
Step 2 — Domain Peer Review: At least one additional Fellow with domain expertise reviews the draft. For methodology papers, this reviewer must have practitioner experience in the subject domain. For intelligence reports, this reviewer must have jurisdiction expertise.
Step 3 — Editorial Review: The Institute's editorial function reviews the publication for citation standards, evidence attribution, and editorial consistency.
Step 4 — Revision and Approval: The lead author revises based on review comments. The Senior Fellow approves the final publication.
Expedited review is available for time-sensitive intelligence publications; the review record notes the expedited process and any limitations this introduces.
ELDR Institute publications follow citation standards consistent with institutional research publication norms. All claims derived from external sources are cited. All quantitative claims are sourced. Regulatory citations reference the primary regulatory text (e.g., NIST SP 800-53 Rev. 5 Section AC-1, not secondary summaries). Framework citations reference the framework version in effect at publication.
Self-citation of prior ELDR Institute publications is permitted and encouraged where the prior publication is directly relevant, but self-citation does not substitute for independent sourcing. Where a finding is based primarily on practitioner experience without independent secondary sources, this is stated explicitly.
ELDR Institute Fellows and researchers are required to disclose material conflicts of interest before undertaking research in any domain where they have a financial, professional, or institutional interest that could reasonably be perceived to influence research findings.
Material conflicts include: current employment or consulting relationships with organizations that are the subject of research; financial interests in entities discussed in publications; board membership or advisory roles with organizations whose governance programs are evaluated. Disclosed conflicts do not automatically disqualify a Fellow from research; they are noted in the publication and the Research Advisory Board determines whether the conflict requires mitigation (co-author, additional review, or scope limitation).
ELDR Institute publications follow a defined lifecycle from research initiation through publication and subsequent updates:
1. Research Commissioning: Research is commissioned by the Institute's Research Advisory Board or proposed by Senior Fellows and approved by the Board. Client-commissioned research is not published under the Institute banner.
2. Research Execution: Fellows conduct research according to the evidence standards described above.
3. Peer Review: Publications undergo the peer review process described above.
4. Publication: Publications are released to Signal Premium subscribers first; public release follows the 30-day exclusivity window.
5. Post-Publication Updates: Material errors are corrected with a versioned update and correction notice. Framework and regulatory changes are addressed in updated editions, not silent revisions. All versions remain accessible.
The ELDR Institute corrects errors. When a material factual error is identified in a published work — whether by the authors, peer reviewers, readers, or regulatory developments — the Institute publishes a correction notice and updates the publication with a new version number.
Corrections distinguish between: material factual errors (incorrect regulatory citations, misattributed statistics, conclusions that cannot be supported by the evidence cited); editorial errors (typographical errors, formatting issues, citation formatting errors); and regulatory updates (subsequent changes to the regulatory framework addressed in the publication, which are addressed in new editions rather than corrections). Silent revision — changing a publication without notation — is not permitted.
The ELDR Institute's research findings may, from time to time, reach conclusions that are inconvenient for ELDR Group's commercial interests, that disagree with positions taken by ELDR advisory clients, or that contradict commonly accepted positions in the governance and compliance practitioner community.
This is expected. Research that only confirms the positions of its institutional home is not research — it is marketing. The Editorial Charter exists to protect the Institute's capacity to publish findings that are accurate, which requires that the capacity to publish findings that are inconvenient be preserved. The Institute's Research Advisory Board has the authority to publish findings over the objection of any ELDR Group commercial interest.
Questions about the Editorial Charter, research methodology, or publication standards should be directed to the Institute.
[email protected]