Jesse, I'm just pointing out that the 3 zone approach described might
actually increase, rather than decrease risk, where that risk doesn't
necessarily need to exist to begin with. Risk can derive from a flawed
process as much as from content. This appears to be a record retention
process to a certain extent masquerading as a record declaration
process. The actual application of retention is buried in a manner that
makes it unlikely to occur - the only attraction seems to be that it
creates the appearance that it's occurring (and no doubt facilitates IT
maintenance as well). 

Personally, I would initially prefer a 2 zone approach to e-mail: it is
a record or it's not a record. It may be that getting consistency in
that is the best first step, in the same way that digital archivists are
emphasizing ingest as a first step in long term preservation. We can
then apply retention in a manner that best fits capability, risk, cost,
and business need - from the biggest of the big buckets to the most
granular of classifications.

Personally, it is difficult for me to determine the greatest source of
risk: a) keeping e-mails too long (b) deleting records before their
retentions expire or (c) consistently misapplying retentions. The 3 zone
approach (among others) assumes (a), but my legal partners are implying
it is actually (b) and (c). That changes the discussion. Perhaps this is
yet another area where RM in government is different than in the private
sector. 

Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution and Stores
(FREDS)
1620 S.E. 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
Phone: (503)988-3741
Fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

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]