RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"Colgan, Julie J." <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 31 Jul 2006 08:50:56 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (84 lines)
Jesse Wilkins wrote:
<Is it more meaningful to use the word "append" or "interfiling" in
procedures for updating physical and electronic records? Is there a
difference?>

To answer your last question first, essentially I don't think there is
much of a difference and with training the blurriness could likely be
clarified.  The only slight connotation that I see is "append" often
means to add to the end of a file, where "interfile" is less specific
and only implies addition to the file.  In my situation, "interfiling"
is what happens more often than "appending" as documents often come to
us in somewhat random order.

As for which is better ... I think it depends on what your user
community would be more comfortable with.  For instance, I can't imagine
that any of my lawyers would instinctively understand what I meant by
saying "you should have your secretary append that material to the
file".  They would, however, understand, "you should have your secretary
interfile that material".  Granted, I haven't stuck my nose very far
into e-records as of yet, however I am pretty familiar with the
terminology at play in the firm and "append" isn't one of them.

So, here at least, I would likely stick to the term "interfile" for both
e and physical records.  I may have to clarify what that means in the
e-world in terms of procedure, but it wouldn't be a difficult concept
for my folks to grasp since I would be using familiar terminology.  I
can see how other industries or situations could go the other way, but
still contend that the final decision is probably best guided by terms
already in play in the organization in order to reduce frustration,
confusion and push-back.

Julie

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Jesse Wilkins
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2006 6:26 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [RM] Append vs. interfile


Hi all, 
 
I am posting this question on behalf of someone not on the list. 
 
We are currently developing standard procedures to manage both
electronic and physical files.  Is it more meaningful to use the word
"append" or "interfiling" in procedures for updating physical and
electronic records? Is there a difference?  We would appreciate feed
back from other companies that have developed filing procedures for
physical and electronic records (or have an opinion). 
 
Any assistance you can provide in response to this query would be most
appreciative. I have my thoughts on this matter but wanted to see if the
list could provide a more definitive response. 
 
Thanks, all!
 
Jesse Wilkins

CDIA+, LIT, ICP, edp, ermM, ecmS

IMERGE Consulting

[log in to unmask]

(303) 574-1455 office

(303) 484-4142 fax

YIM: jessewilkins8511

 

 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
Note:
This message and any attachments from the law firm Arnall Golden Gregory LLP may contain CONFIDENTIAL and legally protected information.  If you are not the addressee and an intended recipient, please do not read, copy, use or disclose this communication to others; also, please notify the sender by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system.  Thank you.

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2