Hi Doug, Peter, et al

It *is* a Friday after all...

Not jumping on Doug's non-jumping on me, nor Peter's, but if I may be
indulged....

<snip type="paraphrase">
I have yet to meet many in the RM community (CIOs, RM Department heads,
etc.) who have any ability to determine how to manage electronic records and
the systems that produce them, as it is increasingly difficult to
distinguish between the two - think a) instant messaging, b) Web content
management systems, c) blogs. RM types in general terms (not all, but many)
fail to understand those situations that arise that have an impact on the
system performance and stability (i.e. legal holds, audit holds, technology
refreshes, requirements for system migration and retirement, the dynamic
nature of almost all software- and server-based systems, etc.) 
</snip>

I think this statement has just as much validity as Doug's - and I think
this is where we too often get into trouble between IT and RM - and frankly
between the business and RM (and between the business and IT too. As an
aside, read any magazine that caters to CIOs, including CIO, CIO Decisions,
Baseline, and Optimize since, oh, 2000 or so and you'll see a litany of
stories about how IT doesn't get it and operates in a vacuum and doesn't
consider all the business challenges like profitability etc. etc. etc. But I
digress). 

Peter said: <snip>
sorry but in my experience very few IT types understand RM  nor do they want
to. let's not forget that IT is the group that has said for years "well we
can just keep everything, storage is cheap" Ask Morgan-Stanley who they now
want in charge?....IT in my experience can't tell the difference between
backup tapes and retention tapes</snip>

I paraphrase again:
In my experience very few RM types understand IT nor do they want to. Let's
not forget that many RM types are MLIS types that have said for years "we
have to create classes, types, and series for every different kind of record
even if that results in 1400 (or more!) buckets that no user can understand
and even RM finds hard to keep straight....RM in my experience can't tell
the difference between potential records files and system files (another
exercise: Do an inventory of a laptop. Mine has 875,000+ files on it; how
many of you know whether or not the following file types could be business
records: .dll .bat .com .hlp? Short answer is probably none of them unless
you're a software company as all of these are system files).

***

In case it isn't clear, I don't subscribe to the points of view I expressed
above in my rephrasings. But I absolutely don't comprehend, whether from RM,
IT, or someone else, this idea that the other side doesn't "get it" and that
*we* are the only keepers of the holy writ. 

My point was primarily that the idea that IT is somehow differently wired at
the DNA level and can never get RM is as legitimate as saying that RM is,
too, and can never understand how to manage electronic information
effectively - but how many of you would admit that? Some of you may in fact
believe it (I don't) - and others of you may think that it's somehow
different when it's RM we're talking about (I don't). 

I do think RM can "get" IT, or at least enough of it to manage records
according to content and regardless of media or format. But IT folks are
pretty smart too, and if they are introduced to an equivalent level of
information, they can "get" RM to the exact same level as you, my RM
professionals, "get" IT. 

I am a big proponent of the idea of reciprocity and of walking a mile with
the other person's mouse. So to end my rant and get off MY soapbox, I leave
you with this thought: Either IT can (must?) have a place in RM, or RM needs
have no place in an increasingly IT- and digitally-oriented world. So I
think the fact that the feds are recognizing that RM must have a place in
their world is excellent

So to come full circle, I am I think mostly in agreement with Larry on this
one. I think many of you have made good points - but I think some of the
points are a bit biased because you are, after all, RM rather than IT for
the most part. And finally, to address Julie's point that kind of started
this in the first place, at least for me, 
<snip>I agree, I just hope that they will look to hire seasoned RM
professionals rather than arm IT folks with marginal RM knowledge and send
them off half-cocked.</snip> 

I just hope they will look to arm IT folks with significant RM knowledge,
recognizing the role RM has to play in the process, and that they will also
look to arm RM folks with sufficient IT knowledge to ensure a meaningful
conversation between RM and IT, and the business, and legal, and and and. 

And to answer my own question, I think Judy gets pretty close, but email's
not the best example. Maybe a better example would be a CM management system
or RDBMS where it's all but impossible to separate the records from the
system that manages them. It has to be a joint initiative IMNSHOOACCA (in my
not so humble opinion on a chilly Colorado afternoon). 

Jesse Wilkins
CDIA+, LIT, ICP, edp, ermm, ecms
IMERGE Consulting
[log in to unmask]
Yahoo! IM: jessewilkins8511
(303) 574-1455 office
(303) 484-4142 fax
Looking for the latest education on electronic records, email, and imaging?
Visit http://www.imergeconsult.com/schedule2.html for a current schedule of
courses. 

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