On 10/2/06, Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> FYI. I think this is an interesting approach in that the association has
> decided to make continuing education mandatory as a condition of continued
> membership.
>
> For those of you not as familiar with RMAA, their membership has a tiered
> structure and experiential and educational requirements to become a
> (professional) Member or Fellow. Because of this, members of RMAA also
> typically indicate their membership status as a credential, e.g. Bob Smith
>
> ARMA, MRMA, or FRMA.
>
> What do YOU think?



Reading it all over on their website
http://www.rmaa.com.au/docs/profdev/index.cfm it seems sort of self
serving.  And I don't mean that as a bad thing... but I guess in part, the
value of it is that the RMAA may be more recognized in Australia as an
Association than ARMA is in the US or elsewhere.  Keep in mind, RM in
general is a more accepted concept in Australia, as they have had a registry
system forever, and essentially all records have always been controlled in
some manner.

If you're a records manager in Australia and you're not a member of RMAA,
employers/organizations are going to wonder why... if you're a records
manager in the US and you're a member of ARMA, many employers/organizations
are going to wonder "What is that?"

Australia HAS a Records Management Standard that is recognized by their
Government and all businesses doing business in Australia... AS4390 is not
only recognized, but it is almost revered.
http://www.caldeson.com/as4390.html   And now, they also have AS 15489
http://www.anao.gov.au/WebSite.nsf/Publications/4A256AE90015F69BCA256BA5000C25D8
  which was distilled from ISO 15489, and Internationally recognized Records
Management Standard that few, if any, organizations in the US are willing to
adopt or accept as being beneficial to pay credence to.

For five years now, ARMA has attempted to gain acceptance of ISO 15489 as a
"best practice" document for US organizations to consider when developing or
evaluating their RIM Programs, and it's been like pulling teeth to get
anyone involved.  Granted, RIM Professionals understand the value of
utilizing the Standard and many presentations are given on its use and
value, but it's been like preaching to the choir.  Few organizations are
interested in adopting ISO 15489... why?  Simple.  There is no REQUIREMENT
to adopting it, and most organizations aren't going to be willing to spend
money to adopt a methodology or practice that they can't be "certified" as
being compliant with, especially if they can't see the benefit/s.

While some of the benefits may seem intangible, there should be no question
that having a uniform practice and process by which you manage your
information assets across an organization DOES have a bottom line benefit.
If nothing else, you can demonstrate that your own practices are consistent
and during any audit of your RIM Program, that is beneficial.

So in the US, where there is no formally adopted Standard for managing
records and information and there is little recognition of the need for such
a Standard, nor is there wide knowledge of ARMA or the ICRM and what they
mean to Records Management, or what membership or certification add to the
professionals in the profession, it's hard to understand why there would be
a benefit to adopting a CPD criteria tied to ARMA membership.

Larry

-- 
Larry Medina
Danville, CA
RIM Professional since 1972

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