Just a couple of two-cent thoughts on Larry Medina's thread.  I
think Jesse's suggestion for number three was critical three or four
years ago, and remains important.  Not sure is should be number 3 on the
list.  Surveys we have done over the last several years at this
Laboratory have shown that our employees are beginning to recognize that
their e-documents, especially their e-mail, can be records if they
document and show evidence of their business activities and
transactions.  The old-timers (that's most of us) already know their
paper documents can be records.  The surveys also show that employees
here seem to be able to distinguish between records and non-records
based on the FRA definition and on the notion that "records" document or
show evidence of their work.  For our employees, the two biggest issues
on Larry's list are 3 and 4.  These are the two biggest frustrations I
hear:  "Where can I find the regs and retention guidance?" and "Who do
we talk to when we can't figure them out?"  
 
    Larry's number 5 is implicit; no argument with it, but we have to
find other ways to persuade especially upper-level managers (whose
support for a program is often make-or-break) to get on board.  
 
    For the rank and file employees here, Larry's number 1 is possibly
less important because definitions for records, non-records and personal
papers are carefully defined and explained in an online RM training
module that has been available for four years and which many employees
have taken.  What drives their frustration with where to find the
retention guidance and who to talk to about about deciphering it is the
explosion of content:  enormous volumes of unstructured data in the
forms of e-mails and their Office or media-rich attachments and the
avalanche of additional web-based content they deal with every day, and
the seemingly uncontrolled proliferation of printed "reference or
convenience" copies of desktop and web information.  I think what I'm
hearing from employees is that they are at the cutting edge of the
transition from RM to RIM, with an emphasis on managing "content"; and
while they may have an idea of what to do with their records, it is the
content that is driving them nuts.  What we are struggling with is
providing them with the procedures and the tools to manage their content
as well as their records.  
 
    Having said all that, I'll conclude by agreeing with the placement
of Larry's number 1.  Generally, I do think employees in all settings
(public and private) have trouble applying textbook or statutory
definitions to their particular business needs and work environments.
Conversations I've had with RM colleagues who are trying to implement
ERM (or ECM) solutions based on DoD 5015.2 compliant applications are
convinced that until employees are comfortable with a records-non
records definition that is centric to their business needs, ERM
solutions simply will not fly.  In that regard, dealing with the
records-non-records issue is the key to effective change management
(suggested by Larry's number 2), which in turn is probably key to an
effective ERM implementation.  If I were doing a list, I'd replace
Larry's number 5 with Jesse Wilkins' number 3 and it would look like
this.  
 
1) What your organization's definition of a record is.

2) That [Business Content and] Records Management is EVERY employee's
responsibility.

3) Where to find your RM Policy and Retention Schedule.

4) Where to get assistance interpreting the application of both of the
above.

5) That physical and electronic records both exist and should be treated
identically. 

 

Dean Bundy, CRM

Naval Research Laboratory

"Views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender and
do not represent or reflect the official policies or programs of the
Naval Research Laboratory."

 


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