And again....as long as I am the records manager at my organization, any
central scanning in the RM department would be at the total control of
myself, the Records Manager. If I decided that the application was not
appropriate, considering all records management standards and practices as
well as Florida Administrative Code Rules for Electronic Recordkeeping, then
it would not be done. That is one thing that I will not compromise on if
this proposal goes forward here.
Gus
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Gary Vocks
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 10:12 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] help!
Excellent point! It's what I had in mind when I said "rationale behind
deciding to migrate a particular record series from paper" but you said it
much better.
Case in point, we had one department that wanted us to scan a certain record
series consisting of work order forms. The record series had a fairly short
term retention and had virtually no retrieval activity. I declined to
accept this as a valid scanning project as the department could offer no
good reason as to why they needed to have the forms scanned. Had they been
able to demonstrate a valid business benefit to the scanning my decision may
have been different.
Gary Vocks
----- Original Message -----
From: "Graham Kitchen" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 9:45 AM
Subject: Re: [RM] help!
> Has everyone involved in this discussion forgotten that in order to do the
> scanning, a feasibility study and business case must be done. You can't
> just scan everything because the user tells you to.
>
> After the business case proves one way or the other, then you either scan
> or not. Let's not forget the basics in order to get involved in the
> "glitz".....
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
> Behalf Of Gary Vocks
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 6:47 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: help!
>
>
> Speaking from the perspective of someone who has replaced a microfilm
> operation with a hybrid (scan and film at the same time) operation I can
> tell you that filming and scanning are not the same. Everything is
> different, from the rationale behind deciding why to migrate a particular
> record series from paper to the amount of resources involved in the actual
> operation.
>
> I'm all for centralization because it gives RM more control over what is
> scanned/filmed and it also has the probability of reduced cost to the
> institution because of "economy of scale". However, unless you can
> convince
> your administration to provide you with enough resources or you can
> operate
> on an effective charge-back system you'll probably soon find yourself
> overwhelmed by the amount of paper that departments want you to scan.
>
> IMHO, long-term preservation of institution records on microfilm is a
> fairly
> easy sell to your administration. Adding funding for sufficient scanning
> equipment and staff will probably be more problematic especially if
> university funding gets tighter.
>
> Gary Vocks
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Gus Harris" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 22, 2006 4:38 PM
> Subject: [RM] help!
>
>
>> Yikes. I really need some help folks. Of late there are people within
>> our
>> organization who want to have certain records scanned to optical disk.
>> Of
>> course there are issues regarding "what records," retention requirements,
>> cost feasibility, etc. But, what has me alarmed is that they seem to
>> want
>> our Records Management Department to do their scanning! Now, I've been
>> the
>> records manager here for many years and we've provided microfilming of
>> university records, based on my analysis etc., for all these years.
>> However, I have always felt this was the proper thing to do since we are
>> the
>> department with the expertise in micrographic processes...and in this way
>> we
>> could ensure that the process was done correctly. However, I think it is
>> a
>> different situation when you're doing electronic scanning. I just don't
>> believe that is something to centralize in your Records Management
>> Department. I can think of numerous reasons why....but would like to
>> hear
>> from others why document scanning shouldn't be centralized within a large
>> organization...but rather a function within the departments that are
>> utilizing it.
>>
>> Thanks for any info and opinions in advance!
>>
>> Gus Harris
>> Records Manager
>> The Univ. of West FL
>> Pensacola, FL
>> [log in to unmask]
>>
>> 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
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> This message and any attached documents contain information that may be
> confidential and/or privileged. The information herein may also be
> protected by the
> Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 USC Sections 2510-2521. If you
> are not
> the intended recipient, you may not read, copy, distribute, or use this
> information. If you
> have received this transmission in error, please notify the sender
> immediately by reply
> e-mail and delete all copies of this message to include any attachments.
>
> 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
|
