Jesse - I've been thinking through your response from yesterday and I
think for the most part we are saying something similar. However, this
particular sentence is where I think we differ. 
	You wrote" <This is the "I" in RIM - but it doesn't require the
overhead of RM...>"

In my view, RM doesn't necessarily require a lot of "overhead". If a
company has implemented in such a way that all records must be declared
to be managed, then, sure, it's a lot of overhead. At the risk of being
flamed, is this push for "retention management" then, a by-product of
implementing non-government programs to the DOD 50.15 standard (records
declared, frozen, potentially taken out of the environment stored in and
user access changed and managed by a RM department)? Once companies have
implemented this way, has it been discovered that there's all this other
"stuff" that needs to be managed, but they don't call them "records"?

That's why its important when designing a RIM program to look at all the
records & information that needs to be managed and develop the systems
and processes to do so. It may be more than one system, more than one
process, but all the information is handled.

Laurie Carpenter, CRM 
Compliance Manager 
Koch Industries, Inc. 
[log in to unmask] 

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]