Sorry just realised i sent this to the wrong address
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: "Glenn Sanders" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Feb 2, 2013 11:02 AM
Subject: Re: Retention schedules as file structure
To: "Gordy Hoke" <[log in to unmask]>
Cc:

Gordy

it's not a good idea.

File structures serve (at least) three possible purposes: to find things by
browsing when searching doesn't work; to apply security access and
permissions, and to apply retention rules. You will note that only one of
these (browsing) has any benefit to end users, the other two (security,
retention) are for back office people like RM.

The problem is that our common law-based legal system results in pretty
convoluted retention rules, so any resulting file structure will hinder
users rather than help. One of many, many examples: where I work now,
agendas for meetings have a very short life, but minutes of meetings  are
kept much longer. Set your file structure up with separate folders for
agendas and minutes, and 80% of PA's will hate you because they want
folders by meeting not by type of document.

Here in Oz, the KeywordAAA thesaurus published by NSW State Records,
admirable and groundbreaking though it was, is far too heavily influenced
and constrained by retention. So I've insisted that under no circumstances
do we adjust the folder structure to suit back office requirements. As a
result we've gone big bucket in a big way, and will end up keeping lots of
things longer than necessary (a risk we will manage in ways other than via
the folder structure). But the end users do not have to know about
retention, or security, they just check documents into folders which they
know are right for finding things.

Obviously it depends a lot on your system. Some software handles retention
and security in ways which don't intrude on end users, and the browsing
folder structure is separate. If you have really good search functionality
it can reduce the need for browsing, as can shareable  saved searches and
the like. The system I'm working with is pretty primitive, and we have to
closely align the retention rules with the virtual folder structure.

So my message is that your systems and services, including folder
structures, must be aimed primarily at meeting end user / business needs,
and to build anything around retention is the tail wagging the dog. In this
day and age that's not a good career move!

Cheers

Glenn

Glenn Sanders
[log in to unmask]
Australia
0407 187 333
These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked and
they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and Glenn".
Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

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]