While what Chris says has some PAINFUL truth in it, Hugh isn't entirely
wrong.

Where Hugh is quite correct is that Records Managers SHOULD be much more
proactive in assessing situations and evaluating storage settings, whether
they are in-house or provided through a vendor, to ensure the ABSOLUTE BEST
POSSIBLE protection is being provided to the organization's information
assets.  And where deficiencies are identified, pointing them out to
parties with the ability to either remedy the situation or make a change to
reduce the risk.

"We" may not be the ones in charge and while we may not have 'the level of
authority', that doesn't lessen our responsibility to act on behalf of the
organizations we work for and in doing so, elevate the appreciation of the
value trained and experienced Records Managers bring to the table.  If we
EVER hope to be recognized as a profession, that comes from within and by
our actions.  If on the whole "we" aren't recognized as a profession, we
can do more to see we are each individually recognized as PROFESSIONALS.

Hugh is also right that the language in NFPA232 clearly calls out the
records managers as the "responsible party" charged with determining the
adequacy of protection in a storage environment for proper protection of
the information assets being housed there. I've never personally needed
NFPA to tell me this, as a records manager for any organization I have been
employed by, or served as a consultant to, I have ALWAYS thought of this as
a principal part of my responsibilities.... but that's just how I roll.

Can I always influence management to make adjustments to ensure inadequate
protection is improved to the ultimate degree? No, but I can typically
influence them enough to lower the risk to a level they feel the
organization is willing to tolerate. But you can bet when I find the
inadequacies, I document them in a very detailed manner, and after
presenting my case verbally, I always provide a detailed written report
citing each and every risk and the possible result of failing to correct
them, and while this may not prevent a loss from occurring, it shifts the
responsibility for failing to correct it from THIS Professional Records
Manager to someone else.

Those of you who have known me long enough and are familiar with my history
are probably nodding right now about at least one such incident where this
played out.

Larry
[log in to unmask]

On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 9:11 AM, Chris Flynn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 5,
> "I have been saying this for years.........  we will see records managers
> going to prison for egregious behavior in complying with the laws.  NFPA
> 232 makes you the 100% Responsible Party for the Records Center so it will
> be easy for the management to force this down on you."
>
> Yes Hugh, If only saying something made it so.
> Historically, Records Managers are not held to this level of accountabilty
> due to the fact that most do not have this evel of authority. If we were
> say, on par with CPA's we would have a level of protection against upper
> managements "egregious behavior". As it stands today we are not a
> recognized profession. All it takes for a person to be a Records Manager is
> to claim the title. Should we ever attain the status within the business
> community that conferrs the authority, responsibilty, and accountabilty
> then I can see what you desire happening. We are, as group, so far from
> being there that it would be counterproductive to pursue prosecution of the
> majority of Records Managers extant. They go after those that are truly
> responsible and as a result accountable.
>
>
>


-- 
*Lawrence J. 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
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]