Hi Fred and Pilar,

I don't think we're disagreeing much at all, actually.  Admittedly, I hit
send much more prematurely than I intended, but upon consideration of my
option to post on its heels, I chose to move onto other things and let my
initial comment stand, for what it was worth.  I'm glad I did, as it
prompted good discussion!  Now, having a moment of free time, I figured I'd
expand a bit and bring this back to where it started.

First, I didn't cast any opinion upon whether bureaucracy, from whatever
source, is good or bad, efficient or inefficient.  Some is good and some is
bad, some is efficient and some is not as efficient.

I stand by the assertion that records management is a byproduct, a function
if you will, of bureaucracy.  Other things are also functions of
bureaucracy such as org charts.  And I also stand by bureaucracy being a
function of regulation.

The point about *government* regulation may have been a bit narrow, but the
idea of regulation (whether by a government or other authority) stands, and
you (Fred) reiterate in your post.  It is a tool, both for regulating the
behavior of others and for proving the behavior of self and/or others.
Records management is one way to demonstrate these outcomes in a consistent
manner.

Fred said: "So let's be realistic:  it's no more possible for a complex
society to live without some form of bureaucracy, than it is for a complex
society to live without some form of records management (or Information
Governance)."

I generally agree with that premise, but wonder if transparency is really
what we seek, rather than bureaucracy, itself?  Bureaucracy is a means to a
transparent end, with records management being a tool of that bureaucracy?
And I'll toss out that RM and IG are not interchangeable.  RM is a subset
of IG.  More on that in a minute ...

So, back to the future ... David posited in his original post "to what
degree (if any at all) electronic record keeping has or will have the
capability to break the tight connection between bureaucracy and record
keeping, or does record keeping continue to be the gruel that the monster
of bureaucracy demands of us all"?

My post was in response to that question.  So long as bureaucracy exists as
a means to control others (aka regulation), there will be a need of proof
of such control occurring, which necessitates some form of documentation.
Records management, in its purest sense, exists to document behavior
(decisions, transactions, etc.). with a goal of proving/ensuring compliance
with something (laws, rules, policies).  Without a need for
proving/ensuring compliance, there is no need for records management.  The
two are inextricably linked.  I see no shortage of regulation occurring,
and so expect records management to live long.

To the point about media ... I think electronic record keeping (with the
right technology) can present opportunities to make records management less
cumbersome, but it won't erase the reason for it.  Will electronic record
keeping have an effect upon *draconian* bureaucratic processes?  Maybe, but
probably not on scale, in and of itself.

I think moving the conversation up to IG is the real opportunity to address
unnecessary and/or draconian bureaucracy (at least internally applied
bureaucracy).  Information Governance serves as a strategic layer, to
right-size the various information management activities that occur in an
organization - records management, knowledge management, document
management, information management, and so on, based upon the goals of the
organization.  It includes a risk analysis that serves to
validate/invalidate ROI, including resources expended on executing
draconian process, and to balance that ROI across the organization's entire
scope of opportunities and threats.  The result is better aligned
bureaucracy; aimed at establishing transparency at the right place and the
right levels to achieve a defined goal with defined benefits, and the
elimination of bureaucracy that serves no valid master.

But what if the organization itself isn't the master, and is only
establishing bureaucracy to respond to an external master?  I'm interested
to hear more thoughts on this.  Do our information-based economy and
technological realities present an opportunity to effect external
regulation?  Does the US Presidential mandate of last fall mark an era of
change on regulation resulting from a changed information landscape?  Can
we expect external regulators to conduct a similar kind of ROI test upon
the requirements proposed in regulations to ensure the requirements serve a
valid purpose and have defined, achievable and measurable benefits that can
be demonstrated through efficient record keeping?

Julie

-- 
Julie J. Colgan, CRM

[log in to unmask]
http://twitter.com/juliecolgan
http://www.linkedin.com/in/juliejcolgan

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]