Hi All:  This may seem elementary to some, but I'm trying to understand
how organizations apply big bucket records series across departmental
lines.  Here's my issue:

 

Let's say you are starting at the beginning and conducting a
broadly-based process mapping/functional analysis project in order to
capture records inventory/series information throughout the
organization.  In order to carry out such a project, you necessarily
have to identify the organization's different operating
departments/units, interview team leaders, document the business
processes carried out by each department, etc., etc.  After going
through such an exercise, the end product is a departmental breakdown of
functions, processes and business record series.  

 

In researching how various organizations format and configure their
retention schedules, I've seen some very good examples where the top
level buckets tend to be departmental, e.g., Human Relations,
Information Technology, Accounting, etc.  Then, I've seen other equally
good schedules that seem to have somewhat (but never entirely)
eliminated the departmental focus in favor of functional record
categories that cross departmental lines, e.g., Administration, Budget,
Contracts, Property, Safety & Security, etc.   A third choice is to
create retention buckets based not on departments or functions, but
built around work processes.           

 

My questions:

 

(1)     Isn't it somewhat of a waste of time and effort to scrap the end
product that you already have in hand just for the sake of configuring a
schedule that groups like records together, regardless of department?  

 

(2)     Isn't it worth an acceptable level of duplication - e.g.,
contracts will appear as a record series in almost every department - to
label your biggest buckets with names that departmental staff will
easily recognize and that they can zero in on?  In other words, why make
people peruse multiple big buckets each time they want to find a
specific series when they could just go to their primary departmental
bucket to find it?  I realize that you can cross-reference your
retention schedule with a searchable word index, but that's just adding
one more level of complexity to the process.    

 

(3)     Has anyone had success developing a hybrid retention schedule
for their organization, i.e., a schedule that might contain some
elements from each of the types listed above - departmental, functional,
process-focused?

 

I'm interested in hearing what people think about this dilemma.  Am I
over-thinking?

 

--Lee

 

 

Lee R. Nemchek, MLS, CRM
Vice President, Records Management 
Oaktree Capital Management, L.P.
333 South Grand Avenue, 28th Floor
Los Angeles, CA  90071 

p +1 213 830-6252   f +1 213 830-8504
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
www.oaktreecapital.com 

 


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]