Hi all.
My take on this (which I may have outlined before on this listserv) is that
there is a continuum whereby DM, RM etc. are all sub-domains of KM. I like
to express this as: KM > CM > DM > RM > DBM, where 'CM' is 'Content
Management' and 'DBM' is 'Database Management' and the rest are
self-explanatory. As others in this thread have already hinted, as you go
from KM to DBM, you go from highly unstructured to highly structured. What
differentiates each level from the other is its purpose and the type of
management discipline one needs to apply, since 'managing' unstructured
knowledge requires quite different techniques from managing highly
structured databases.
Thus, many KM/CM/DM/RM software vendors are now gravitating to a model
focusing on the KM/DM/RM cycle. DM is distinguished by the fact that its
'information objects' (documents) have the purpose of supporting operational
activities. Once that purpose is fulfilled, a document may or may not need
to be stored as a 'record' or a component of a record. If not, then it can
be destroyed. On the other hand, if it contains information which could
prove of use to the organization in the future, then it should not be
destroyed, but should become part of the KM resource. As Robert Soutar
suggests, it is important to look at the whole knowledge and information
management requirements of an organization - KM, CM, DM, RM and DBM - before
devising a strategy.
Best regards,
Bob
>>>>>Bob Bater<<<<<
>>Principal Associate<<
>>InfoPlex Associates<<
>>>>Bristol, UK<<<<
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Robert Soutar
Sent: 12 April 2005 20:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: DM vs RM retention
John,
DM and RM are like apples and oranges. Placing them in the same fruit
basket though provides users with a better selection of fruit. I view
DM as a process to create and develop records and other information,
where RM is the function that stores, enables retrieval and disposition
(or archives) of records. Once records are created and finalized in DM,
they are moved and classified to the RM system. Both systems are used
to retrieve information when required, but they must work together to
provide users with the most recent information on any specific topic.
Separating these two disciplines is not the best way to manage
information.
Regards,
Robert Soutar
Manager, Information & Records Management
Canada Deposit Insurance Corporation
www.cdic.ca
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
Phone: (613) 947-0662
Fax: (613) 996-6095
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of John Annunziello
Sent: April 12, 2005 10:08 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: DM vs RM retention
I recently read the following statement and am struggling with the
concept:
"While DM repositories are generally focused on keeping as much as
possible for future reference , RM repositories are generally focused on
keeping only what is necessary for a specified length of time"
I agree on the later statement, but the thought of keeping documents for
an unlimited period of time is not sitting well with me. What are your
thoughts?
John Annunziello
Records Information Specialist
Toronto and Region Conservation Authority
5 Shoreham Drive
Downsview, Ontario M3N 1S4
(416) 661-6600 ext. 5272
fax: (416) 661-6898
[log in to unmask]
"Live life to the fullest, enjoy the little things everyday"
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
