Sharon wrote:
> Why pass legislation where compliance becomes a problem?

PeterK wrote:
> Because like a lot of legislation it makes them feel good

Actually, I think they are trying to achieve a goal: accountable,
transparent government.

The issue of e-mail is running into a brick wall that has been entirely
predictable. On the corporate side, we hear the same complaints about
compliance with SOX. What it all boils down to is how important is
transparency and accountability, and how much is one willing to spend to
achieve it. Conversely, what are the costs of not achieving it?

One can automatically assume that most leadership groups are probably
not willing to spend much, as it is, after all, their accountability
that is generally the issue. One can equally assume that aggrieved
parties, including plaintiffs, aggravated citizens, shareholders, the
fourth estate and a myriad of other interest groups, will want to do
whatever is necessary to "uncover the facts" regarding their particular
area of concern, as they are generally the stakeholders paying the costs
of not achieving transparency and accountability. Throw in anti-tax,
anti-government, anti-regulation, anti-politician, anti-corporate,
anti-the-other, anti-whatever asides and we end up with a classic
dilemma: we all want what we are unwilling to pay for. 

That's because one of the main costs of a lack of
transparency/accountability is cynicism about the institutions which we
empower to spend or provide resources for the common good. Why throw
good money after bad? Its kind of like the snake eating his own tail.

Its possible that, as technology advances, the cost of this compliance
will not be as high as it currently is, and this issue will, in time,
become part of the normal course of business. One can only hope so, but
unfortunately I don't think the barriers are entirely technical in
nature.

To repeat - how important is accountability and transparency, and how
much are you willing to spend to see it achieved? For our profession,
these issues should be very important. They will continue to resonate
into the future. Yet they lack a voice connecting ideals with practical
solutions.

For example, in this particular article: if it is truly the e-mails of
top leaders and administrators that are causing the greatest concerns,
why are we focusing on controlling all e-mails at all levels of the vast
federal government. Wouldn't it make more sense from a policy and fiscal
standpoint to target first the areas of greatest risk and concern? Is it
really necessary to spend the money necessary to attack the entire
problem at once? 

Sounds familiar, doesn't it? We deal with issues of this nature every
day: achieving records keeping goals with minimal resources. It seems to
me that developing practical and affordable solutions to improving
accountability is something everyone can approve of - even the most
"anti" of groups. 

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
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]