This from a technologist with a strong (self-interested) bias toward RIMs.

I see a lot of opportunity in the adage: "RMs own the rules; IT owns the
tools".

This probably seems quixotic but let me explain.  IT is all about justifying
the expense of new tools.  Typically when we propose a rock-solid, even
cheapest, solution in response to a customer's requirements the customer
nonetheless wants it to be cheaper still.  In that game we take on risks to
reduce costs and we're not always happy with the tools that we get in the
end.  If RMs can set policies that meet minimum business requirements then
we can spend our time building the most efficient infrastructures to meet
the policy requirements.  And when a customer still wants a cheaper solution
we can invite them to get a policy exemption.

Here's an analagous situation.  A consumer wants a home built.  They hire
contractors who have built homes many times before.  Then the consumer sits
down with, say, the electrical contractor and says:  "Can't you make this
cheaper for me by using this guage wiring instead?"  "Well, I could but the
city code (policy) requires this minimum."   It may seem geeky but we IT
Staff members get very excited about new and better wire guages but we often
need policy to get change accepted by those who will have to pay.

I, for instance, am very grateful for this listserv because it keeps me very
well informed about business impacts of poor record management and the
current state of legislative challenges.  But I hope that I can keep my day
job focused on infrastructure building rather than the corporate governance
around records that leads to smart policies.  I want to add my expertise
where it can serve the creators of good policy but I don't want IT tools to
create and establish de facto policies.

Here is a very hard question for anyone in IT today: When does data become a
record and then what does compliance require that you do with it?  IT knows
data.  We don't know records very well at all.  IT is just coming up to the
struggle and recognition that not all data is valuable and some data may
pose significant liability issues.

So I see great opportunities in a synergies between RM disciplines and IT
infrastructure building.

JESSE WILKINS writes:

> Hi Dwight and everyone else who has commented -
>
>> What would happen if RM staff had a substantial bias for successful
>> IT-based solutions?
>
> I think that's a very good point - our industrial history is replete with
> examples of using technology to make work, and life, faster, easier, and
> more efficient. Technology is not always the answer to all things -
> witness
> the regular resurgence of things like artisan baking, organic foodstuffs,
> handmade furniture, and the like. But there's a reason we don't build cars
> by hand - the sheer volume required to meet demand would make it
> cost-prohibitive. Similarly, we can't simultaneously claim to manage
> records
> by content, rather than media, and manage millions of emails a day (even
> discounting spam and administrivial messages) through "print & file". I
> think we'd be better off, frankly, if RM staff *did* have a substantial
> bias
> towards technology AND if IT had a substantial bias towards process and
> compliance. They are starting to get it, based on requirements like COSO,
> CoBIT, ITIL, and others....are we?
>
> From a technologist with a slight but not overwhelming bias towards RM,
>
> Jesse Wilkins
> CDIA+, LIT, EDP, ICP
> IMERGE Consulting
> (303) 574-1455 office
> (303) 484-4142 fax
> [log in to unmask]
> Yahoo!:  jessewilkins8511
>
> 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