<The definition given by Ginny is the 2nd (well, almost 3rd) cut that
SNIA
took at it and it came after more than a year of a few RIMs attempting
to
convince them that to redefine a term that's had an accepted definition
for
DECADES and trying to force their definition on individuals charged with
managing information since before there were servers was wrong.>

Here is where I start to diverge in agreement with Larry.  I don't
believe the term Information Lifecycle Management is the term we in the
RIM profession have used for decades.  I believe for much of the time,
we've used the term Records Lifecycle Management or Life Cycle
Management of Records.  The same issue arises with the terms Information
Management and Records Management.  We've added the "Information" piece
to RIM only within the past few years -- and we did not remove the
"Records" piece because it would have been confusing.

< The whole concept of designing a process to institute the most cost
effective means of managing information and basing that on usage
patterns goes completely against what RIM and Information Lifecycle
Management is about.>

I agree.  It is accepted, though, that this is what IT is about - and
has been for a considerable amount of time.  It's their job to provide
cost efficient technology.  Their analysis is mostly based on "hard"
dollars (software and hardware) vs. RIM's focus on "soft" dollars
(compliance, avoidance of information loss, etc.)

<The addition of "business requirements" to their definition came a bit
later in the game>

Better late than never I say!


Ginny Jones
(Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI)
Records Manager
Information Technology Division
Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities
Newport News, VA
[log in to unmask]

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