Dear Bill
Thank you for your lengthy and thoughtful reply. It is a privilege to
hear the opinions of one who has been involved with the RIM scene and
its relevant professionals associations for a lengthy period of time - a
true 'wisdom of the elders'! And I certainly do not mean this in any
negative way!
I really am hoping that ARMA members respond, as indeed, it is their
money which will be committed to whatever endeavours the SPC decides
upon. I have had the privilege of having read the TF report, and, like
you, I note many lacunae. My overall impression is that it was focused
on developing a strategy to achieve an objective, without critical
analysis of the objective. But that's just my view.
I wonder if this is an accurate summary of your argument:
1. You believe that internationalisation should underlie all our
efforts, as global citizens, and that includes our role as RIMs, in that
this view increasingly will affect our work.
2. The primary benefit of having international members in an
organisation such as ARMA would be that such international members would
be highly visible, and that international developments, references (and
possibly access to) international publications should be numerous and
regarded as equally significant as any US or ARMA publications.
Additionally, significant US and ARMA publications should be made
available in other major languages, such as, perhaps, German, French,
Spanish, Portuguese and Japanese.
3. Collaboration with other RIM professional organisations should
extend to all such organisations, including the national RIM
associations where they exist.
4. ARMA should not attempt to become an umbrella international
organisation, but instead should focus on how international developments
might affect existing ARMA members.
5. Close analysis and discussion of the role of ARMA as 'global
thought leader in RIM' should be undertaken. As you note later on in
your piece, it would be extremely interesting to hear what the
international RIM community might have to say about this, and what
ARMA's track record is, to date, in this dimension!
6. The ICA congress, and the papers presented there - in
particular by ARMA members - should be made generally available to all
ARMA members.
7. The TF should have sought wider representation in its efforts
from its existing international members, and perhaps from the
international RIM community.
8. A financial analysis and balance sheet should be produced
indicated the money spent on internationalisation efforts thus far; what
the projected internationalisation efforts might cost, and what ROI
there will be, for members and for the association.
9. Discussions with other associations with international
experience should take place, including, for example, AIIM.
10. International members should be asked the same questions as appear
in this mini-questionnaire.
I will leave it to others to comment on these issues, and I would hope
that the motivation might well be, What's in it for us? What do we get
from our dollars being spent in this way? How can they be better spent?
I, for one, find it difficult to disagree with many of the points you
have raised.
I would like to note, however, that the International Ambassadors -
Hella Bartolo (sadly deceased in 2004); Claudette Samuels (as
International Director until 2003); Sonia Black, Masashi Kotani, Vaughan
Spooner, Sharon Alexander-Gooding and myself, have been providing
international input for a considerable period of time. It is sad to
have to report that this has been a long and arduous road, and at times
we have felt rather like Sisyphus - the chap who was doomed to
continually roll a boulder uphill, only to have it roll down again each
time...
Bill, it might interest you to note that I have asked the international
members in my region several of these questions (this questionnaire is
probably worth repeating in its entirety) and I must note that lack of
confidence in English precluded many responses. Having said that, there
were consistent themes (and remember these are existing, fee-paying ARMA
members): there is lack of awareness of the financial constraints
placed in these members when everything is charged at standard US dollar
rates; their only real benefit is the Information Management Journal;
there few or no references to international activities in their
countries (e.g. China, Russia, South Korea, Singapore, Indonesia, and
Australia); all conferences take place in the US and it is much too
expensive for them to consider attending; there are no regional
conferences; there are other associations to which to belong, notably
national ones, but also organisations such as ICA and AIIM, which often
receive precedence in their attention; while all news is US-biased, it
is interesting to see what the US is up to - but the US is not
considered a leader in the field of RIM (this distinction is presently
held by Australia); there is a need for a truly international and
inclusive forum because of the nature of the contemporary environment.
International members certainly see themselves as a minority 'other' (to
use Foucault's term), even though, using elementary arithmetic, US RIM
professionals constitute only a small percentage of RIM practitioners
world-wide. In fact, it might be true to suggest that many of these
international members might have more in common with each other than
with the US, for a range of reasons, not least such issues as general
lack of resources.
I am looking forward to further debate on this issue on the listserv.
All the best from sunny Adelaide
Sue Myburgh
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Saturday, 23 July 2005 7:29 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ARMA Strategic Planning - Internationalisation
Sue, thank you. You have provided a platform for discussing some very
significant issues about ARMA and its international activities. I
sincerely hope
you receive some responses. The Task Force report should be read to
understand
what is happening. Forgive me if my answer is a bit lengthy, I am very
concerned about the direction being taken.
What does internationalism mean to you, as North American Members?
Internationalism to me means a spirit or policy of cooperation and
mutual
understanding with individuals and organizations throughout the world.
Individuals and
organizations that have a primary interest in records and information
management and its related disciplines
Do you think that increasing international membership will assist you?
For
the sake of numbers, NO! For the purpose of establishing meaningful
contacts
and resources, Yes! But it has not worked that way. Who are our
international
members? What is their involvement in RIM. You don't find significant
foreign publications (in English) mentioned by ARMA. Like many other
ARMA members
I have presented seminars worldwide. These have resulted in published
books
and articles in Japanese, Portuguese, and French. I am certain this is
also
true of other speakers. When the IRMC published Glossaries in German,
French,
Spanish, Portuguese, and Japanese, they were never even mentioned by
ARMA.
Internationalism is not only ARMA generated or marketed publications.
The Task
Force action plan does not address this issue.
Do you think that collaboration between the ICA and ARMA is useful? Of
course! So is collaboration with RMAA (Australasia), BRMS (Great
Britain) RSJ
(Japan). Remember, it was The RMAA that was responsible for the
development of
ISO15489, The ICA has put out some excellent studies on records
management and
electronic records. The Australian government has published some very
valuable
studies on the application of ISO15489 as has the Records Management
Society
of Great Britain. Yet, we can't get a meaningful presentation on the
subject
from HQ for chapter use. What happens to the presentations made at the
ICA
or the Conference International Day?.
Do you think that ARMA should become the international umbrella for the
records profession? Absolutely not! Why did it withdraw from the IRMC
when all
the other associations supported the concept? "Global thought leader in
RIM?
What does that mean? According to the Beacon report, which makes no
mention of
international RIM, ARMA needs to undertake a major branding effort, it
needs
to establish better relationships with its chapters, and it needs an
IBM
stature. Sounds like our international program (with, of course,
consultant
assistance) is putting the cart before the horse.
What role do you think ARMA might play in internationalism? A critical
issue
not addressed by the task force. Evident by the singular representation
on
the Task Force by an international member. I would think that the
ambassadors
would be a critical part of this study. The budgetary aspects of the
suggested approach have not been identified. Is there an international
relations
balance sheet? How is the current $50,000 international budget with no
revenues
(plus other cost not reflected) explained? Chapters now underwrite LINC
memberships. LINC people are now asking for support to attend the
conference.
Will national offer a discount price or share the cost with chapters?
Economics
are a critical part of the international scene. In its sharing role with
AIIM,
has ARMA discussed with then the AIIM international experience?
Allocation of fund. I have been a member of ICA for many years. Their
Comma
publication is excellent. It has multi-lingual articles. Its newsletter
is in
English and French. I have also purchased materials from Australia and
Great
Britain. I do not advocate an every language approach, or the conversion
of
all publications. A query of our current international members would
have been
a valuable guide in many of the issues covered by your questions and in
the
Task Force study.
Sue, I guess it would be interesting to ask international members on
their
reaction to global thought leader.
Bill Benedon
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
|
