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:
Angie Fares <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 15 Apr 2011 14:15:36 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (34 lines)
Dear Listserv
 
I was chatting with a consultant over an issue that, I think, many of us
have had to weigh in on when making decisions about enterprise content
management.  The question was..."is it better to arrange content by
function and then by department...or by department and then by function?
In my experience, it has mostly depended on how that information was
used and shared, whether there were common retention requirements, and
what sort of metadata was used to index it.  In organizations with a lot
of stakeholders in primary  content, you are more likely to find it
grouped by function first, then by department.  In organizations that
don't share as much information across multiple workgroups, it is more
likely to be grouped by department first although there may be some
folders within the department that are shared with other workgroups
because of its function.  
 
Has anyone seen other successful arrangements of electronic content or
experienced more success with one approach vs. another?  
 
Warmest regards,
 
Angie Fares
 
 
 
 
 
 

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