Hi all,
I can't let this one go by without saying something. Standards are not
just for compliance. They can be used for best practice. There are
literally hundreds of Standards that we use in this industry everyday
that have no Compliance measurement (i.e. getting the "tick in the box"
attached to them. For example: Metadata, workflow process analysis,
business classification schemes, policies, corporate governance, etc.,
etc. And yet each business will endeavour to "comply with the
Standard". With regard to Quality Systems compliance, it is a fact that
less and less organisations are looking to achieving the "tick in the
box" to be compliant with ISO9000 and are now having their quality
systems included as part of their auditing process....the same applies
for environmental standards ISO14000. In my mind that still means that
they are "compliant" with the relevant Standard
Having said that (and as I have said previously on this list), ISO 15489
has been used many times by a number of Governments to audit departments
in their jurisdiction. Here in Australia, the Australian National Audit
Office (ANAO) has conducted "audits" of Recordkeeping activities for a
number of departments. Please find a sample at the following link:
http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/4A256AE90015F69BCA256BA5
000C25D8 . ANAO used the Standard as the benchmark for 'best practice'
against which the departments were measured. So I guess the "tick in
the box" for compliance in this case was an external auditor with a
clean or not so clean audit report that was tabled in the Federal
Parliament of Australia, which I think carries far more weight in the
organisation than a "tick" and means that the organisation is regularly
examining it's Records Management operations efficiency and
effectiveness rather than a snapshot compliance statement. So if you
really want to get a clean bill of health for your Records Management
systems, processes and requirements...get a third party independent
auditor as part of your annual audit to use 15489.
Without being derogatory to any RM consultants in the industry (I used
to be one until very recently), this type of audit is not your standard
RM consulting assignment and should be rolled up with other auditing
activities. Certainly, you may want to include some RM advice as part of
the audit to help explain process, but really it is an audit process.
Having said all that, both the International Standards committee for
Records Management (ISO-TC46-SC11) and the Australian Standards
Committee for Recordkeeping (IT/21) have recognized the need for a
compliance standard and have been working on this for sometime. In
Australia, we are in the final stages of writing a Compliance Standard
for Recordkeeping and hope to launch this within the next couple of
months....stay tuned.
Cheers,
David Moldrich,
Chair, ISO TC46 SC11 (Records Management)
Chair, IT/21 (Recordkeeping)
National Director, RMAA
Vice-President, RMAA (Vic Branch)
Fellow, RMAA
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: Thursday, 21 April 2005 2:38 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ISO 15489 - what's the benefit
What's the sense of going through all of this unless there is some kind
of official certification obtained at the end? I have a program that is
(and has been for 3 years) 95% compliant with the criteria listed in ISO
15489. I was only waiting until we purchased and installed our new
content management/records management system (now in progress) to more
efficiently handle electronic records before going all-out for ISO
15489. I was under the impressions three years ago that this guide was
to become a standard, and I would be ready to meet it when it did become
a standard. However, as it is still just a guide, I now see no benefit
to spending my limited resources on ISO 15489. Also, I can proclaim I'm
compliant, but if there is no outside evaluation, certification, or
unbiased assessment to back me up, I can make whatever claims I want, be
they true or false. Who's to tell me I wrong?
If an organization is just beginning to build or reorganize a
document/records program, it may be a wonderful tool to use as a
structured approach and to prevent costly errors, but for those of us
who are already there, again I ask what's the use?
Any opinions out there on this?
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of [log in to unmask]
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2005 11:07 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: ISO 15489
The ISO has not established a certification procedure for 15489. It is a
voluntary standard and compliance is a recommended to assure a workable
approach to records management. The Australian standard (AS4390)upon
which
ISO15489 is
based contains a questionnaire for measuring compliance and ARMA offers
an assessment package (available through its Book Store). As mentioned
there are several good presentations on the subject as well as one on
the ARMA website given by ARMA Hq staff.
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
This message and any attached files may contain information that is confidential and/or subject of legal privilege intended only for use by the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient or the person responsible for delivering the message to the intended recipient, be advised that you have received this message in error and that any dissemination, copying or use of this message or attachment is strictly forbidden, as is the disclosure of the information therein. If you have received this message in error please notify the sender immediately and delete the message.
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
