My, My, My! How long will this discussion about undergound pipes and their classification as records go on. Let's put auto, airplane parts, and other objects into the pot. They too, or at least pictures, specs, etc. are in the record category. Maybe I came in to the discussion too late and the purpose of the inquiry came into the picture long ago. A look at the proposed changes to the NARA regulations on records management adds some interesting concerns, regardless of the fact that they pertain mainly to the Federal record.Have any RMs been looking at these revisions. They support ISO15489 and have something to sy about "records.".
 

--- On Thu, 8/21/08, WALLIS Dwight D <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

From: WALLIS Dwight D <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: [RM] enquiry on record management and the relation with data mining
To: [log in to unmask]
Date: Thursday, August 21, 2008, 1:20 PM

If you take this e-mail, print it out, photocopy it 70 times, plaster it
on walls, stick a copy on a pipe, forward 80 versions to your friends,
and have the Goodyear Blimp fly overhead displaying it, you have
recorded the information on countless media (and you would also be more
than a little strange). Yet only a few copies would be a record as
defined within the context of your records management policy. All others
are non-record items, not subject to records management control, and
hopefully as ephemeral as my morning coffee. To claim that these are all
records implies records management controls - why would you possibly
want to do that? I can't imagine even attempting to cost justify such an
approach. Yes, they do require controls - such as the delete key, an IT
policy removing extraneous e-mails after a certain point, the recycle
bin, training, etc... These are relatively cheap, simple solutions. They
most definitely do not require taxonomies, retention controls,
disposition documentation, etc... etc.... a much more expensive, and
expansive, proposition.

The fact that records managers occasionally get called into court
regarding x or y piece of evidence may be more related to an overly
expansive identification of responsibility than whether x or y was
actually a record. Perhaps it is also evidence of the inability of
record keeping systems to capture records appropriately. Hopefully, such
expansiveness is covered by an equally expansive budget. That budget
would be better spent capturing and controlling records, and eliminating
non-records as quickly as possible, not controlling the entire known
universe of potential "evidence".

Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution and Stores
(FREDS)
1620 S.E. 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
Phone: (503)988-3741
Fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present,
place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]