RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Jay Maechtlen <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 5 Jan 2006 16:37:20 -0800
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (74 lines)
Regarding "official records"-
Let me pose a question here:

When a copy of a document (which may be an "official record" in some 
context) is used in another context (software evaluation, etc) then can 
(should) it become an entirely different "official record" in that new 
context?
The example that John Dowling posed: That document might appear in three 
different context - the individuals personal file; a financial file 
authorising the payment of a bonus; a file identifying rewards and 
payments.

Could we argue that these are three seperate records, each with a 
different purpose?

Should they be stored individually, even in the electronic document 
repository?
If so, it could certainly clarify retention requirements and methods, 
couldn't it?

Regards
Jay

Jay Maechtlen
Ameriquest Data Service

This is just a test... if this was an actual sig, you would have been 
mildly amused... 

Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]> wrote on 01/05/2006 
04:21:56 PM:

> Hi John,
> I'm glad you joined the discussion because this seems to point us to the
> issue of applying retention to electronic documents in an electronic
> document management system.  I believe that one of the "benefits" of an 
EDMS
> is to eliminate the duplicate copies and keep only one copy of each
> document.  This is great, but I think it requires a very careful 
retention
> analysis of each document so we retain the document to meet each and/or 
all
> purposes of the document.  Or do we allow each recipient of the document 
to
> file/register/declare the record under the retention code that applies 
to
> their purpose?  If that is the plan, then we have defeated the benefit 
of
> eliminating copies.
> 
> Any thoughts?
> Mary
> 
> Mary W. Haider
> Records & Information Manager
> 
> List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
> Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance



-----------------------------------------
The information in this email, and any attachments, may contain
confidential information and is intended solely for the attention and
use of the named addressee(s). It must not be disclosed to any
person(s) without authorization. If you are not the intended recipient,
or a person responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient,
you are not authorized to, and must not, disclose, copy, distribute, or
retain this message or any part of it. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately.

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

ATOM RSS1 RSS2