Like Patrick and Peter, I always emphasize the need to maintain
certification when requesting travel to the Conference.  I also make
sure the travel funds have been included in the appropriate budget
request for the year.  Even so, there are years when I do not have the
Conference approved.  Getting presentations accepted or being accepted
as a volunteer session monitor sessions helps (both defray the cost of
registration).  Also, if you get employer support to take part in Boards
or Committees at the National level (including the ICRM), your travel
expenses (airfare or mileage) may be covered if the Board or Committee
meets during or adjacent to Conference. 

Like Patrick I also tie attendance into learning objectives - usually
based on current or planned projects.  I use the session description
provided by ARMA. For example, this is the justification I used for
Baltimore (I have been given responsibility to establish eDiscovery
policies as part of my goals for fiscal year 2008):

	<In addition to visiting various vendor exhibits in the Expo, I
plan to attend three particular education sessions that I believe will
aid in our planned initiative regarding discovery/e-discovery/legal
hold:

Mini-Sedona Conference Panel Discussion
This session will be an interactive dialogue with some of the leading
minds in the legal and records management fields discussing the impact
of electronic records on the discovery process. Participants will be
asked to review the latest release of The Sedona Guidelines in advance
of the session and to engage in open dialogue with other participants
and the session faculty. 
NOTE: Seating is limited to 70 attendees and will be on a first-come,
first-serve basis.

Data Mapping to Support E-Discovery
Rule 26 of the new Federal Rules of Civil Procedure presumes that your
company can disclose - in relatively short order - the electronic
information that it is retaining that is accessible, as well as the
electronic information that is inaccessible or will not be searched for
production. In this session, learn the process for preparing a data map
that inventories the systems used by the company and the types of data
created or maintained by these systems.

Legal Holds for "Anticipated" Litigation: New Case Developments
This session is a follow-up to the 2004 study for the ARMA Educational
Foundation, entitled, "Spoliation and Legal Holds - Identifying a
Checklist for the Duty to Preserve." This supplemental course will deal
with the thorny issue of what is considered potential or anticipated
litigation for purposes of triggering litigation holds. Since Zubulake
and the Arthur Andersen Supreme Court decisions, companies are
struggling with timing and scope for issuance of legal holds for
"potential" litigation, without paralyzing the company. The session will
address recent case developments that tackle these issues head-on. This
cutting-edge topic is critical for not only records and information
managers, but also any other disciplines involved in discovery and legal
holds procedures.>

When I return, I am expected to provide a trip report that includes
summaries of what I learned and how it applies to our RM program and
planned projects.

Ginny Jones
(Virginia A. Jones, CRM, FAI)
Records Manager
Information Technology Division
Newport News Dept. of Public Utilities
Newport News, VA
[log in to unmask]

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]