ABSTRACT Digital membership organizations assert that their innovative use of data-driven practices is at the heart of their people-powered decision-making models. These data-driven practices, and associated values, have become aspirational to other organizations. However, there are growing concerns that data practices reinforce the decision-making power of the data collector at the expense of the rights of the data subject. This research considers how traditional membership organizations adapt to these new data-driven practices, while addressing these concerns. This paper demonstrates how the political communication theory of the trustee, delegate, and responsible leadership models resolves the tension in the discourse surrounding data practices by exploring the positives and negatives of both decentralized decision-making and centralized decision-making. The framework is then explored in practice through an ethnographic case study of Amnesty International. The results show how the use of data to be people-powered is a powerful discourse, but ultimately new data practices are only used to centralize power, as is purported by critical literature.

中文翻译：

---

适应民间社会组织中以数据为依据的做法：国际特赦组织的案例研究

摘要数字会员组织断言，其对数据驱动实践的创新使用是其以人为本的决策模型的核心。这些以数据为依据的做法以及相关的价值观已成为其他组织的追求。但是，人们越来越担心数据实践会以牺牲数据主体的权利为代价来增强数据收集器的决策能力。这项研究考虑了传统的会员组织如何适应这些新的数据驱动的做法，同时解决了这些问题。本文演示了受托人，代表，负责任的领导模型通过探索分散决策和集中决策的利弊来解决围绕数据实践的讨论中的紧张局势。然后通过国际特赦组织的人种学案例研究在实践中探索该框架。结果表明，以数据为动力的说法是有力的论述，但是正如批评文献所声称的那样，最终，新的数据实践仅用于集中权力。