Debbie ferguson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> You have an established retention policy but do you have a written procedure in
> place with it that requires departments to designate a specific person (or team)
> that is responsible for ensuring the retention policy is followed? [snip] Few things
> ensure compliance with any process more than having someones name stamped
> on the "responsible for" line.

Debra makes an excellent point about accountability. If you have no
system in place that will hold someone's toes to the fire for not
abiding by the schedule (yes, that was a metaphor but pardon me for a
minute while I enjoy the mental image...), then you'll always face an
uphill battle. You could consider adding a statement to your retention
schedule (or its related policy) that describes how non-compliance
will be handled, or your organization could make retention compliance
part of the performance review process.

As for her second point, I would comment that the better way to ensure
compliance is through monitoring and reporting. Naming names might
help at the outset, but that alone isn't enough to guarantee diligence
in the long run. But monitoring and reporting shouldn't be
characterized as a punitive measure; they're intended to determine
whether processes are working as intended, or whether modifications
need to be made to reflect changes to your organization's internal or
external environment.

Regards,
Taina Makinen
[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]