Something is missing from the ARMA Radar Screen.We have been addressing misconceptions for a long time, but the association voice is needed.
Bill Benedon
Larry Medina <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Although there may be Gartner analysts who do have a clue, there is risk
> for
> all of us in the profession, whenever Gartner issues any paper,
> recommendation, etc. that trivializes RIM. Although we should not be
> surprised that they don't know, their word carries significant weight at
> the
> executive level, and is something that we must address.
CREAAAAAAAAAAAAK....Clunk.... Ka-ching!!!
Uh-oh... sounds like a major league size can of worms being opened here!!!
=)
I agree with much of what's been said about the report Bill originally
cited and all others being written from veiled viewpoints and one-sided
knowledge bases. We in the RIM Profession have been faced with this same
problem for a LONG TIME now and although it's getting somewhat better, we
have a long way to go.
But Doug exposed what seems to STILL be the biggest problem we face when he
said that it's what those at the executive level read... and he's right on
target, we need to find ways to address this.
I am constantly finding articles in the trade journals and other tech rags
extolling the virtues of one system or another, or mistating the value of
"archiving information" or installing "information lifecycle management
solutions" to "achieve regulatory compliance", almost all of which are
written by ill-informed vendors, IT hacks or others that have virtually no
comprehension of the existence of established RIM processes, procedures
and/or best practices. And while at times I feel I may be tilting at
windmills, I send comments to the editors, or the writers, or the companies
who generate the press releases to tell them that they either mistated or
misunderstood the concept when they prepared the article, that the
information is presented from an uninformed viewpoint and that they have (in
most cases) failed completely to take into account the existence of RIM. And
I know a few others in our profession do the same, but we either need MORE
of us to do this, or we need a BETTER WAY to get our message out.
What we REALLY need is a voice that can get to be as loud as the Gartners
or Forresters or Forbes and that can be heard by the same audiences as a
counter point to these veiled sales pitches for products and tools being
marketed as solutions to problems that haven't been properly analyzed. There
are some VERY GOOD products on the market presently that go a long way
towards assisting organizations gaining much better control of their
information, but without the perspective of an RIM in the process, the
products fall short of being a "solution". They are primarily tools or tool
sets that a well seasoned RIM can utilize as part of an overall solution to
meeting an organizations specific requirements to developing a complete
Records and Information Management Program. And there are components of
these programs that there ARE NO TOOLS for at this point yet, and without a
full understanding of how RIM works, these pieces will be left behind... and
in many cases can result in large gaps and potentially costly problems for
organizations.
So..what do we do about it?? Well, That my friends and fellow RIMs is the
$64,000 question. What SHOULD we do about it? How do we form an "editorial
board" that is willing to keep an eye out for these articles, reports, white
papers, guides, etc. and evaluate the content and where there is
misinformation, develop a response and then get the response to someone that
is willing to print it? And I don't think the answer is to simply say what
is WRONG with the piece, but to offer something that says what the piece was
originally intending to say, or that points out the gaps in the knowledge
presented.
Any suggestions? Peter K and I tried doing this "though channels" for a
six-month period with an association that said they were once interested in
trying to do something about this. We found articles, ands as I'm doing now,
wrote rebuttal pieces and forwarded them on thinking that if a NAMED
ORGANIZATION was willing to present the responses, maybe someone would
listen more than they were willing to listen to individuals... but nothing
ever happened. Now, it's just a few of us who get MAD AS HELL at reading all
of this drivel that take up the charge to respond... so, what DO WE DO about
it???
Larry
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
|
