David Gaynon wrote:
>These are or should be business decisions made for business reasons.
When the financial model is compelling it does not take much effort to
convince management to automate specific information resources.
Absolutely correct, David, and very well put. As I pointed out (but
didn't expand on), one of the principle barriers to "going paperless"
relates to resources. To be blunt, it doesn't always make sense to go
paperless - it does make sense to use the best tools available.
The public sector has many more stakeholders than the private sector
does, therefore issues of business process do not always play the
prominent role (public access, for example, may be inefficient, but it
is absolutely necessary). In addition, when you are working in a
primarily social services environment, you are working in an environment
that is highly stressful, volatile, and subject to rapid turnover of
management.
In my experience, it hardly takes any effort to convince management to
automate specific information resources. What takes the effort is to
convince them to do it properly in a manner that saves tax dollars,
improves processes, and protects the public interest. All too often the
goal is to "get rid of the paper" or "get rid of the clerical staff",
with virtually no attention paid to either process improvement or the
public interest. My goal is to get them to see beyond the paper to what
technology can and can not do.
Therefore my principle focus is on records keeping across technologies.
In my opinion, if a technology has to serve a records keeping purpose,
yet is incapable of meeting that purpose, it ultimately will neither
improve business processes or get rid of the paper (in fact, more than
likely it will increase the amount of paper). The reason we need to
express this in a visionary manner is to counteract alternative
compelling visions that are "high tech, paperless", yet may be ill
advised. We need to provide a similarly bold vision that creates real
change and ensures the best use of the tools available.
Some time ago, a county office went towards imaging. I knew they were
doing it wrong, yet I am not a Records Cop; I have to sell my services
to my customers just like everyone else, and they can ignore me if they
want. When I tried to address these issues (much in the same manner you
describe), the attitude was that I am protecting my turf, I want to
store more paper, etc...The manager in charge had seen the Xerox
commercials of Greek gods and goddesses effortlessly working in a
paperless world, and that was his vision, and nothing would convince him
otherwise. And, of course, the vendors and IT were more than happy to
comply. Bottom line, we are now getting more paper from these people
than ever before, and, as predicted, the system appears to have crashed
and burned. If I truly was protecting my "paper turf", my best strategy
would be to just let people like this continue to make the same
mistakes, because the results have been pretty predictable.
We need a vision that can counteract such attitudes in a similarly
compelling manner, grab people's limited attention, and direct them in
the right direction. I don't have a problem sharing people's general
dislike for paper, if that is what will get my foot in the door to make
sure that good decisions are made, and the proper tools are used.
Maarja, any records manager worth her or his salt recognizes the
importance of archival records. You are absolutely correct in raising
concerns about this. Therefore the necessity to address the issue up
front as new systems, processes, and technologies are developed is
crucial. I hope someday we will have archival systems commonly used that
will capture and maintain archival records in their native formats. In
my opinion, that is currently possible in certain limited areas, yet
overall it continues to be an issue that has not been adequately
addressed. In addition, you have raised in the past the impact that the
current political and journalistic climate has had on the willingness of
high level officials to maintain complete records of their actions. I
think this is having more of an impact on the maintenance of the kind of
historic records you wish to see than is any given technology, and
believe that the issues in question are much broader than records
management issues: they are issues of transparency and accountability in
a global economy.
Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records & Distribution Services Manager
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution & Stores
(FREDS)
1620 SE 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
|
