I second Bill comments.

An essential paradigm shift that is occuring in IT is a realization that not
all information is valuable and over time: a greater and greater segment of
information will become a liability rather than a corporate asset as time
passes.  Part of the IT realization is driven by the high costs of legal
discovery and Bernadette's hypothesis removes that.

Another way to think of the information store and the information segments
is to ask an investment question: Do I expect to be able to make money with
this in the future?  And the corrollary, Is it possible that I will lose
money with this in the future?

The decision calculus on "to save or not to save" for the segments that have
a "Yes" and a "Yes" answer is ambiguous.  But for the "No" and "Yes"
segments the decision is easy: Get rid of it.

This may always seem short-sighted because information will have different
values later and what is worthless now may be valuable later.  Or litigation
threats may fade.  But, presumably, we're all comfortable with the concept
of "the best decision at the time".


Roach, Bill J. writes:

>>>"We will seek to change the statutory requirement for mandatory
> destruction of records and substitute a more flexible and less
> labor-intensive approach to meeting agency needs to keep some records
> longer than their NARA-approved disposition authorities (retention
> schedules) specify."<<
>
> The approach that NARA is taking is fine for an organization that is
> insulated by sovereign immunity.  It is a real problem for organizations
> that are not.
>
> It appears from the discussions that have taken place on the list for
> the past several days that many have forgotten some of the key
> requirements and reasons for a records retention program; Disposition in
> the regular course of business and the impact of old, open for
> interpretation, records.  Have we forgotten about directed verdicts and
> adverse inference?   Piper Aircraft and their claim for having a
> retention program?  How about the asbestos, silicone breast implants, or
> Chevy truck gas tanks?  Maybe the following will be helpful:
> http://library.findlaw.com/1993/Jan/1/129313.html
>
> Especially in today's environment of short notes rather than well
> thought out statements, retaining everything forever is a very dangerous
> standard.  I challenge any organization to critically look at your
> records and say that they would not be damaging if someone was to use
> them 20, 30 or even 50 years from today.  A big part of our function is
> to insure our organizations are protected from liability from old,
> incomplete, and cryptic records.
>
> Flexible retention guidelines and permanent retention "just because we
> can" may be palatable to the feds, but not to anyone else.
>
> Bill R
>
> 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