Link, Gary M. <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Well, Tom, like many things, "it depends."


Yep it sure does =)  And I think it's cool that we've come to a point where
we feel good about discussing our relationships here, even if they ARE about
contracts...

I have a feeling the comments you receive will run the gamut, in part
because it depends on how your retention schedule is designed.  

If it's organizational, you'll do things one way; if it's functional you'll
do them another.  If it's written in an aggregated ('bucket") manner, you
may only have one series for Communications, Correspondence, Procurement or
Contracts; if it's highly granular, you can have divisions and series for
any level of categories you want, it's just tougher to get uniform
compliance when it's used.

Reading the first two comments you received, my first question would be,
What is the objective?  To keep everything associated with a/the Contract
together, or to keep Correspondence together and subdivide it by
subject/contract?  Given how you phrased the original question, it seems as
if your primary concern is the Contract, and things related to it.  

So, if your record series is "Contracts" and you have sub series for
"Communications" and sub-sub series for "Communications Related to XYZ" then
all information related to the Contract remains together.

If your record series is "Communications" and you have a sub series for
"Contracts" and sub-sub series for "Suppliers" then you need to have even
further subdivisions to isolate correspondence for any specific contract.

A lot of this depends on your business model and what you see your risks of
having (or not having) every scrap of communications may be.  I can see
arguments for/against either keeping it all or keeping as little as
possible, but whatever you do, it needs to be consistent.  I've yet to see
an RM Policy or Retention Schedule that calls out using different
methodologies for the service provider/vendor you're doing business with,
aside from the placement of destruction holds or freezes related to specific
parties/matters.  

As for what you do with paper as opposed to e-mail, I come from the school
of consistent application "regardless of media, form or format" when it
comes to retention.  The first decision is "Is this a Record?" and if it is,
then you categorize it and assign retention... if it's not then you destroy
it as soon as practical.  The thing to remember about e-mail is it's a form
of conveyance of content, it isn't a record series.  The retention should be
set based on what the subject matter of the e-mail is.

I'm not in favor of the products that suggest a copy of EVERY e-mail be kept
and indexed and then you can find whatever whenever.  Personal experience
dictates that less than 5% of e-mail (in the great majority of cases) meets
the organization's definition of a record.  So why keep copies of the 95%
that doesn't, even for a month? And no it's NOT cheaper... one smoking gun
will prove that.

Lots more could be said, but that's where I'm stopping for now.  

Larry
[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]