Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Wed, 13 Jun 2007 17:39:32 -0400 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I recently attended a presentation at the PRISM Conference and the
discussion centered on how the Board of Directors of major
corporations are reacting to new legislation that pierces the
corporate veil and makes them personally liable for certain events
with regard to safeguarding records and digital content, e-records, etc.
The icons of the American Corporate World are now putting pressure on
Congress to modify current laws to ease their burden. Wall Street
recognizes that protecting corporate records is vital to a growing
stock market so they are not supporting any relief on these laws that
could destroy market confidence on the authenticity of corporate
performance.
So the Board and C-Level officers are asking for guidance on what
protection they must deliver, what is prudent behavior? What
troubles many executives is; they are asking that those who expose
them to danger also share in the risk exposure. This obviously would
scare the heck out of companies who cannot seem to control that which
they manage. Offsite storage companies that vault media will be
called to higher levels of security and if they fail to deliver they
share the expenses of their exposure of their clients' data loss.
What exposure should be enacted on those who exposed the TJMAXX
client base? What about couriers who lose tapes?
Since no matter what happens the Board has the liability, the fear in
the Board room is palpable.
Currently Congress is contemplating extending the sanctions on media
records to paper documents. So we have gone from paper documents
being the record, to a period of time where legislators considered
digital/erecords as the only record with liability to full circle
where they now recognize losing paper documents is also a bad thing.
Amazing!
NAID was really the first to recognize this and pursue and develop a
full Certification for records in their care. So many have adopted
their Standard for shredding that it is now extending to other
areas. This is scaring those who fail to see any need for real
security for records storage, records destruction and media storage.
Boards of Directors are looking for some authentication as to what
they can expect from their vendors.
As a Media Vault Manufacturer, we are seeing a huge step up in sales
as executive management is either choosing a vendor who will secure
their media or installing their own vaults. Server Vaulting is also
gaining in popularity.
All of this bodes well for the records manager as the Decision Makers
are supporting good records management and security control.
ARMA's championing of the E-Storage Guideline and Vital Records
Guideline position records managers in a favorable light. This in
concert with the continual pressure of new legislation make it a
great time for records managers to be more vocal with legal and audit
about your role in protecting the organization.
In a legal perspectives presentation, the Board of Directors surveyed
felt that 80% of their companies are inadequate in their in-house
controls of records. This is either the fear talking or corporate
America has a real problem. ARMA is not doing a good enough job in
promoting what our organization is all about to these executives at
this time of real interest.
Are any of you feeling the pressure from above about creating
transparency for records control and more emphasis on security? If
so, what is management asking for? Do any of you feel an increase in
awareness of the value of good records management?
Hugh Smith
FIRELOCK Fireproof Modular Vaults
[log in to unmask]
(610) 756-4440 Fax (610) 756-4134
WWW.FIRELOCK.COM
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
|
|