I just wanted to thank everyone for their thoughts on this topic, both
public and private. A number of private sector colleagues felt that
regulation was heavier in the private sector, or at least the same, as
did our good friend Glenn Sanders from Australia - I think Chuck
Piotrowski's point about the relative "weight" of regulation may be a
good response. 

I also got some great private responses about the need for collaboration
in developing private sector programs (in lieu of public sector
regulations that are relatively clear and presented as a package). Yet
another respondent felt that consensus in the public sector was more
challenging. Perhaps the particular organizational dynamics of a given
entity has more weight than whether it is public or private.

One respondent commented on the challenges of obtaining funding in the
private sector - proving ROI is critical. I think that applies to the
public sector as well - however note that one incentive in the private
sector for improvements may be increased market share along with reduced
costs/increased profits due to improved/enhanced service. That may
broaden the way in which ROI can be defined in the private sector,
particularly in those areas that directly impact customer service.
However, it sounds like initial start-up funds are a challenge in any
community, and it may be that my own view of this is somewhat skewed by
local conditions. 

One public sector respondent also pointed "to heightened awareness of
potential scrutiny of each and every activity, communication, meeting,
etc." I would add that in many public sector organizations, records
custodian is defined very broadly, often placing the onus to
successfully meet that scrutiny in a very broad scope amongst
individuals who deal directly and even indirectly with the public. My
sense is this scrutiny tends to get better channeled in the private
sector.

Finally, John Gervais pointed out that methodology remains the same
within a variety of regulatory environments. I think I agree with you
John, but I'm not sure. To what degree is methodology changing to match
these different environments, and to what degree are those environments
diverging/converging? To what degree do the different sets of
stakeholders lead to different methodologies in meeting their needs?

Perhaps where this is most clearly shown is in the area that no one
mentioned - archives. How does the existence of an archives - or rather,
the responsibility to preserve an archives - impact methodology? And, is
this a factor primarily in the public sector?

Thanks, folks, for your thoughts!

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