Chris, I am not disagreeing with you, but I would like clarification.
Based on your statements below are you in favor of microfilming residing
in the RM department? If so, is this because microfilming results in a
physical record(s) being produced that needs to be maintained by the RM
department v. scanning resulting in an electronic record that is
maintained by the IT staff based on the organization's RM policy and
schedule? Thanks
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Chris Flynn
Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 5:46 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] help!
Gus,
I've done this so you can ignore what I say if you want.
There is going to be an argument that scanning is like microfilming so
RM should do it for the org. Well, scanning ain't microfilming. I think
the notion got started by vendors selling the idea that they had been in
"imaging" for twetny years so you can trust them with implementing
scanning.
Well you might trust them to do it, but microfilming is a different
kettle of fish. For those that think I am wrong about this, get over it.
Distribute scanning operations throughout the organization. Rather than
pass the cost of imaging onto the patron, [pass the cost of the scanner
onto them. Hopefully you can offset at least some of the cost centrally.
You will want to pay attention to load balancing. If you are using Kofax
it will help you determine the beefiness of the scanner needed. Keep in
mind that scannners serve two primary functions. The first, and longest
lasting
(hopefully) is to capture records entering your system form the outside.
This will be with us for a while for two reasons, thel ow cost of paper
and the unwillingness of Records Managers to tell everyone to quit it
(OK the issue may be a little more complicated than that). The second
use for scanner is as a migration tool to electronic. Capture the
backfile and move it to elctronic images. Thte idea is that you don't
replace the scanners when obsolete (what you thought you were going to
wear it out? that's so cute).
Use your retention schedule to control the imaging at the departmental
level. Now this part is important. Make sure your schedule is FUNCTION
based. If you are not sure, go check out a few Charles Dollar books or
call him in on the phone. You have to know the termnantion date of the
series when it enters the system. Case in point, HR files are scheduled
from date of hire not date of ternmination.
TRUST BILL GATES
I still live within five hundred miles of Redmond so it is considered
the healthy thing to say. While there is no proof that bad things happen
to those the differ with the satement, there are rumors. Bill says that
MS is reverse compatible back to version one. We don't hav eto worry
about that much anyomore, mostly the oldest stuff is 95. So, you scan
records with a retentio nperiod of over ten years, capture the rest in
native format.
Within three years your backfile is gone and all that is being scanned
is records from outside the org and archival records, yea right. But
that is the plan.
SO WHERE DOES RM FIT?
I thnk that was your basic question. We write the policy and procedure,
oversee operations, set standards, train, own the project. We ensure
that the operation is COBIT or COSO compliant.
Records Center Operations.
I always liked the idea of scan on demand out of the records center. I
just never had the staff to do it and I gave all my scanners away except
for my archival scanner. I was a sweet Canon 4080U flatbed scanner with
ADF, 600 DPI, ah well better days.
Now should RM do all the scanning? what are you nuts? want to kill the
concept? Tell all the directors that all scan technicians will repart to
the RM and staff poositions and buget will come out of their operational
budgets. How do you justify having thwir staff do the scanning? They
already do the record creation and controls. Ira Penn did a study a long
time ago.
The study, I think was for UNESCO, I could be wrong showed that there
was a
2/3 saving in administrative cost by implementing RM. A late study, by
who knows, showed an additional 2/3 savings. They will recoup the loss.
for the cites you can bother Bill Roach or Peter, they are both really
old and might remember those sorts of things.
Gus I would be happy to chat with you directly about this. Drop me a
line
Chris Flynn
--
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.385 / Virus Database: 268.2.6/286 - Release Date: 3/20/06
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
|
