RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jesse Wilkins <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 21 May 2009 10:36:00 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (39 lines)
Let me also make one other point. IIRC, records management started out as
space management - in other words, since organizations couldn't keep
everything for forever due to space, there had to be a way to distinguish
between "stuff to keep" and "stuff to get rid of". That's a fundamental
first principle of records management.
Many of the classification schemes we've created over the years - Dewey
Decimal, LOC, etc. have then been used as a mechanism to provide metadata to
the physical world. Indeed, the analogy for poor metadata/indexing is often
that of a library with all the books piled in the middle of the floor, or
with the books on the shelves but their covers ripped off, etc. A filing
cabinet really isn't much more than record+metadata - why is this paper put
in this folder, drawer, cabinet, room, etc.

So put these two together and you end up with the traditional paper-oriented
records retention schedule that is doing double duty for retention and
findability. If you dissociate those two things, and I'd argue in the
electronic world you not only can but should, then retention goes back to
being what it started as: what to keep and what to get rid of. Sure, you
could make hundreds or thousands of rules based on the specific requirements
of dozens or hundreds of statutes and regulations - or you could say here
are 3 buckets: Short-term (less than a year), mid-term (1-10 years), and
long-term/undetermined/permanent/whatever. Make it 4 buckets. 5 buckets.
Whatever. The point is, and the point I think most of the BBT proponents
make, is to use the right tools for findability and to make retention as
simple as possible. Again, that may mean a slightly higher storage cost and
a slightly increased risk that you'd produce something that might have been
disposable earlier. But those risks in most cases and for most organizations
are acceptable compared to the benefits of understanding and complying with
retention requirements.

Regards,

jesse

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2