In a message dated 7/2/2005 11:58:33 PM Eastern Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

> "it cuts both ways. I think one of the major difficulties in implementation
> of  electronic
> records solutions is the dearth  of interdisciplinary communications -- even
> between archivists and records  managers, let alone between either of those
> groups and information technology or  history professional groups."
>
I agree, Rick.  First off, thanks for the correction on Eduard Mark's name, I
realized after I posted that I misspelled it.  I couldn't remember which it
was and be assured, I did a search in Recmgmt-L logs both for Eduard Mark and
Eduard Marks and came up empty.

I've been looking since 2001 for a forum where historians, records managers,
and archivists can join in virtual communication.  Haven't found it yet but
haven't given up, either.  As you know from seeing me post on the Archives List,
I'm nothing if not persistant.  As you'll see below, I think Listservs have
their limitations.  Instead of relying on Listservs, I'd much rather see
historians, archivists and records managers speaking at each others' conventions,
and, even more importantly, doing q & a and otherwise engaging in dialogue.
Right now, I'd hesitate to go to a historians' web forum and suggest they read
the postings on Archives List or Recmgmt-L.  But I think they need to learn more
about ARM and RIM issues, from somewhere.

ARM professionals are more likely to have some framework for understanding
history than academic historians have for the technical aspects of archival or
records management issues.  Many people who work in the field of archives or
records management read history books, after all.  All you have to do is look
through the source notes for a good book and you can see what contemporaneous
records are required to write an authoritative, credible history book.  It's
easy then to ask oneself, is this type of information still being captured now?
I'm not saying you need to capture it within your own organizations.  Some
organizations have a very limited business need to keep records at length.
Lawyers in the private sector may even encourage them to get rid of records as soon
as it is legally possible.  But everyone can project from the books and
commission reports that they read why certain records need to be preserved on the
national (federal) level.

Within an agency or organizations, people know each other and often feel they
are "in it together." At least in my experience, they often have a vested
interest in viewing their colleagues as allies and keeping them informed.  That's
not to say there may not be places where personality conflicts or opposing
dynamics cause tension.  I, for one, want my colleagues to do well and succeed.
And vice versa.  I have many friends who work as archivists, records
managers, and historians.  We're not competitive, there are no dominance hierarchies
of the type that sometimes crop up on message boards or blog comment boards.

I find many pitfalls in posting on Listservs.  I would bet that some of the
people who tangle with each other on Listservs and message boards probably
would communicate very differently face to face with others.  There seems to be
something about Listservs and even more so about message boards that sometimes
heightens "ritual opposition," jockeying for position, etc.  We net posters
certainly are leaving an interesting trail of differing communication styles for
future study by many different disciplines, LOL. I've already seen one blogger
mention Professor Tannen in discussing the potential for conflict between
those interested in lengthy, introspective postings (me!!!) and those seeking
short questions and answers (many of you!)  That's why I brought up the image of
people standing in different corners of a large meeting room at a convention.


Aside from styles of communication, I often see other problems in public
forums such as message boards, blogs, listservs.  I once posted about a records
issue on a history blog only to have one of the professors respond in a way that
made it clear he had confused records management with management of archival
collections.  I had to explain what is appraisal, what are retention
schedules, how you apply risk assessment, etc.  Not surprisingly, my explanation met
with silence -- once it became clear the professor had erred, the thread stopped
cold.  You see some of the same confusion among some IT professionals,
notably in the link on the NARA ERA on the Slashdot forum that Robin Riat provided
our List on June 27th.

Why has it been so hard for me to get other historians interested in
archives, records and information management?  (No, it isn't just that I write long
postings, :-p .  Academics, of all people, are comfortable with introspection
and carefully sourced critical analysis. )  Maybe I just haven't found the right
forum.

John Earl Haynes and Eduard Mark and I had some thoughtful exchanges about
record keeping on a H-net forum a couple of years ago.  Haynes noted the impact
of early disclosure laws, describing how he reacted to the chilling effect of
journalistic and political inquiries while working as a policy maker.  He now
works as an historian at the Library of Congress.  Haynes observed that "In my
post-political role as a acquirer of historical records, the drastic
diminution of the richness of the record between those created before the mid-1970s
and later is obvious.  The practical result of legally mandated rapid disclosure
of the records of policy makers has been to impoverish the historical record.
 Records not created are not available, ever, for historical research."  As
you saw in the link I posted on Friday, Eduard Mark has noted what he called a
crisis in current federal record keeping.  But few of the H-net forums lend
themselves to a discussion of records management.  If posters don't pick up on a
thread, it just ends.

While it is easy for me to talk individually to Federal historians, few of
them post in public forums.  Eduard Mark is the notable exception and we have
talked only through e-mail, never face to face.  Academic historians post all
over the place but seem to shy away from engaging in discussions of archival
issues and record keeping.  I don't know why.  I know many of them are teachers
(professors).  But I've run across a surprising number of academics who project
a vibe of "I know what I know, I'm not interested in what I don't know," very
curious to observe.  So it is an uphill battle to try to educate some of them
about archival and records issues.

Rick, I look forward to seeing the results of your survey of records users,
but I have to say, I don't know what is the best forum in which to publicize
what you've found!  It's been hard for me to find forums in which to bring
together historians, archivists and records managers.  But I commend you for being
one of the few people to work on these issues!  I'm not easily discouraged so
I'll keep trying, also.

Maarja

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance