Jesse Wilkins wrote:
>That said, lemme throw this out there: Do you record, transcribe, or
otherwise keep extraordinarily detailed notes of every meeting you have?
If not, how would the activity in a collaborative tool (I assume here
like whiteboarding, chat, etc. Think eRoom or Webex) be any different?
Now, if you do, that's different. But if you don't - if you instead keep
the deliverable that the collaboration related to as the record, and get
rid of drafts, notes, etc. once the record is complete and published,
why would you keep the electronic collaboration detritus?

Jesse, unfortunately, this is almost identical to the "its just like a
phone call" argument made years ago regarding email. I wish it were so,
but its not. Logic, past practice, and our own personal wishes all too
often have nothing to do with this - the legal system defines the
parameters.

Having said that, I agree to a large extent with the idea that
appropriate use, for now, is the best approach to these technologies.
The legal risk will define itself over time. I think it is a mistake to
take a maximal risk approach before that risk has become apparent. Email
may be a bad model, as it is a technology that presents a unique set of
risks that may not be as pertinent with more recent collaborative tools.
Its also fairly straightforward to define a retention policy that states
that drafts, working copies, etc... are retained until superceded. So,
to a large extent, I agree with your end point - I don't necessarily
agree with the argument you use to get there. My argument would be: 1)
use appropriately (2) define and follow retention policy. I would define
the latter in a manner that facilitates business purposes, until a legal
issue arises that forces a change. 

This is one reason why I am a bit concerned by public records
definitions based on form (for example, if its text, it's a record). If
we define retention based on content/function, why not the records
themselves. Of, if we are defining records on the basis of form, lets
start better defining the forms or technologies that do not constitute
records.

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]