Hi Maureen
Just thought I'd throw in my two cents on worth on function based classification. The way I see it, and this is my view only, it is based on what we are doing and why. The why gives us the function, as that is the reason for our existence as an organisation. This is usually laid down in legislation for government organisations. Functions can be determined from legislation (why the organisation exists) and an examination of the actual business of the organisation at the broadest level.
We classify not just for today but for tomorrow and what better way to locate information than by what it was created for and why, it's context, rather than what it is or is about.
An example I can provide is the provision of professional health services, to classify any records created for this by function I would need to know why the services were being provided, e.g. if the organisation providing the services was created and legislated to provide the services then it would belong to a medical or hospital function. However, if the services were being provided as part of a program for assisting people with disabilities and the organisation does not have any legislative requirements to provide the services then it becomes an activity of the organisation as part of its function to provide progams to aid and develop people with disabilities. The disablity organisation does not exist to provide professional health services but to provide programs that will assist people with disabilities. Future researchers can locate the disability records by searching terms based on why the records were created (to manage disability programs - function), what was done (provided professional health services - activity) and what type of service (Speech Therapy - subject/transaction/topic) and who, etc. (Joseph Bloggs - free text). This would give a classification, and file title, along the lines of:
DISABILITY PROGRAMS - PROFESSIONAL HEALTH SERVICES - Physiotherapy - Joseph Bloggs
This tells me what is happening (providing health professional services), what type of services (Physiotherapy) and why (to provide services to persons with disabilities - not to patients at hospitals or medical centres). Albeit, this is a simple example.
My ramble. Hope it isn't too confusing.
Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to you and all the other list members up there.
Regardsu
Wayne
----- Original Message ----
From: Maureen cusack <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Tuesday, 19 December, 2006 4:47:04 AM
Subject: Re: [RM] function based classification
BASCS ("basis") the Canadian federal government system is conceptually
thorough and I was lucky enough to have personal guidance from the people
who developed it as I implemented most of it (that is, the administrative
categories that existed in early 2005) for a provincial government agency.
Thanks.
So it's one thing to have a definition, I discovered, another thing to
implement a scheme true to its intended usage. When you really inspect some
schemas - like DIRKS - the definition may seem workable on paper but then
little aspects that don't work for your organization can trip you up and
make the whole proposition unworkable. Functions-based classification is
difficult to get right from beginning to end.
Maureen Cusack, M.I.St.
http://www.maureencusack.net
_________________________________________________________________
WIN up to $10,000 in cash or prizes – enter the Microsoft Office Live
Sweepstakes http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/aub0050001581mrt/direct/01/
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
