Excellent comments, John G. and John A., especially in what you say 
about explicit versus tacit knowledge.

To some extent, internal oral history interviews or exit interviews can 
fill in some gaps in institutional knowledge.  But, let's face it, that 
largely depends on the individual.  Some people are introspective by 
nature and willing to be candid.  The best ones can provide useful 
insights into processes and issues at an institutution. And to help 
future managers learn some lessons that will help them.  Of course, not 
everyone is suited to helping with knowledge transfer. Put a recorder 
in front of some people and you may find that they simply recount the 
high points of their careers and leave it at that.

Benis Frank (History and Museums Division Headquarters, United States 
Marine Corps ) compiled some oral history interviewing tips during the 
1980s, which have been re-posted at
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/oralusmc.htm .  My favorite is the 
admonition to the interviewer not to fall asleep in the middle of the 
interview, LOL.  The Marine Corps history division later updated this 
primer (in 2005?) in a more matter of fact version.  Baylor University 
has some good oral history information on its website as do a number of 
other institutions.  (Just Google oral history and primer.)

Of course, records can be more reliable than lore.  Stephen Haycox 
wrote an interesting article on memory and documentation for the 
Anchorage Daily News in December 2002.  See "Rely on Documents, Not 
Memory" at
http://www.adn.com/opinion/story/2275181p-2337946c.html .  Haycox noted 
that:

"in each construction of memory, people reshape, omit, distort, combine 
and reorganize details from the past to fit their changing notion of 
the world, of who they are and who their audience is. For this reason, 
neither historians nor attorneys put much faith in unaided human 
memory. For reliability, memory has to be corroborated by documentary 
evidence. The documents may not always be 'true,' but unlike memory, 
they stay the same unless they've been altered, which is why in court 
extraordinary measures are taken to verify the authenticity, 
originality and unaltered character of the documents.

A common method of searching for truth in legal proceedings is to 
introduce the documents, then question the witness. Historians use a 
similar method, checking the assertions of memoirists against the rest 
of the documentary record, including other writers' assertions, 
official letters, memos and orders and the like."

That makes sense.  It helps to bring along a few documents to an oral 
history interview, so you can hand them to the interview subject and 
ask, "what do you remember about this?"

As to Bill's comments, all of us who work with records know that 
history didn't just start in the electronic age.  Some useful bits of 
knowledge show up in old, paper based records that, to this day, 
undergird some policy analysis and legal research.  Lovely as it would 
be to digitize it all, I just don't think every institution will have 
the resources to digitize every old record and publication that ever 
was created in the paper-based era.   This is especially true for 
Federal government agencies.  As the sobering $20 million dollar 
shortfall in NARA's budget indicates, budgets for civil agencies look 
to be tight for some time to come.

I've drawn on some records from the 1920s and 1930s in some of the 
research I did at GAO.  See
http://www.indiantrust.com/_pdfs/2002.04.23_GAO_Letter.pdf
for an example.

We may be in the digital age now, but, as you can see from the link 
above, I still handle paper based records.  They don't just recount 
musty dusty stuff that no one cares about anymore.   I doubt those 75 
and 85 year old records referenced in the 2002 GAO letter will all be 
digitized any time soon.   And if they aren't, then I guess those grade 
school kids aren't going to find 'em, LOL.  And anyway, somebody has to 
teach those kids that knowledge matters.  That's the biggest challenge! 
  (And just wait until they get to college.  Has anyone read Thomas 
Reeves' observations on his experiences as a former history professor?  
When I saw him quote from a student who dropped out of one of his 
history classes with the statement "I hate old stuff," it made me glad 
I went into government service, not teaching!)

Still, I'm glad to see that John A. and John G. are so interested in 
knowledge management.  And that Steve and Bill are confident that 
retention schedules will do the trick as far as saving electronic 
records for "whoever is on the other end of the phone" 20 years from 
now.  I'm 55 with 33 years service, and eligible already for federal 
retirement, so it probably won't be me, LOL.  As you all probably have 
guessed, I get great satisfaction from being able to provide my 
colleagues with the knowledge they need to do their work.

Maarja



Maarja


________________________________________________________________________
Check out AOL.com today. Breaking news, video search, pictures, email 
and IM. All on demand. Always Free.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance