On Thu, Mar 27, 2014 at 1:06 PM, Glen Sanderson
<[log in to unmask]>wrote:

> Nick Inglis posed this question
> " When a Record is disposed from the Records Management system, how
> confident are you that the information contained is actually now gone from
> the organization?"
>
> Two words to answer your question.
>
> Not Very.
>

Devil is in the details.

If your process is designed properly to determine HOW and WHEN content is
ingested into an ERMS and controls are established as to WHO can access it
and WHAT they can do with it, then you should be relatively confident that
you are doing more than simply 'removing the pointer/indexing' that
provides access to the image/content stored and that the content itself is
actually deleted.

Where you run into problems is if a wide range of users can access, copy,
re-store and re-purpose the content .But, IF IT IS A RECORD and your policy
clearly states a record must remain irrefutable and cannot be copied,
revised, re-named, or re-used... then you shouldn't have a problem.  NOW...
if it's an ECMS and you store "Records" and "Content", then you're talking
about a whole different thing. And it's even a bigger issue is "content"
can at some point in it's life be declared a record.

It's kinda funny to me that there is one faction of people who argue
against the concept of 'declaring a record' but then want to say it's
nearly impossible to manage content effectively.  Or similarly, they argue
about the ever growing volume of content .If "content" are non-records, the
requirement for managing it to the standards applied to records doesn't
apply. There is no assigned retention period, so after it reaches a point
where whatever reason you kept it hanging around for is met, you discard
it.  But it shouldn't be stored in the same repository as your records,
which have rules applied to their use, management, retention, and
ultimately, disposition.

My only concern regarding confidence on disposition is backup tapes... but
because backup tapes are only generated for the purpose of recovering a
system in the event of a catastrophic failure, and they are cycled, even
these should be a non-issue, and if declared and properly managed, they
shouldn't be subject to discovery.

Larry
[log in to unmask]

-- 


*Lawrence J. Medina Danville, CARIM Professional since 1972*

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]