Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 19 Dec 2006 20:24:10 +1100 |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
At 04:47 AM 19/12/2006, Maureen cusack wrote: When you really inspect
some schemas - like DIRKS - the definition may seem workable on paper
but then little aspects that don't work for your organization can
trip you up and make the whole proposition unworkable.
DIRKS is not a schema but a computer based methodology. If the
business processes are fully documented as part of undertaking
analysis of your business processes then such a study will work. Gaps
may arise if past business functions and activities are not
documented to consider older records and information management
resources, which still have to be managed. If your Information
Technology area is involved in undertaking an analysis of business
processed they I would strongly recommend they utilise the DIRKS
questions which can be obtained from the National Archives of
Australia website or New South Wales State Records website. I would
also recommend records managers get involved in such a study as both
parties can work closely together and achieve a great understanding
of the business including records and information. Records staff can
develop a functional based classification scheme and the IT staff can
use the outcome to develop more efficient and effective systems
including the information architecture for the organisation.
The biggest issue I see with functional based classification is it
that requires cultural shift from current practices which are often
unstructured, ad-hoc and subject based. It also requires files to be
broken down into more specific functions and activities. In
subject-based classification I frequently find files have multiple
disposal classes such as a file for occupational health and safety as
described in the example below:
1. Advertising which only needs to be kept 2 years
2. Committee minutes, which are required to be kept for 10 years.
3. Routine inspections to be kept 7 years
4. Hazardous materials, which are a State archive.
(Disposal timeframes quoted are based upon New South Wales General
Disposal Authority 2: Administrative Records)
I favour function, activity and then subject descriptor with free
text to follow.
Jenny Evans
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
|
|