>I'd be interested in hearing what you think should be done in this case,
>and who should do it.  I've had more than enough of my own experience in
>trying to work with some vendors who have no interest in listening to
>others.... and have found it a poor investment of time to engage them.

Doug-

While I agree that working with vendors independently on some issues may
result in a lack of acceptance, this is substantially different.  This is a
well established group of large vendors that are seeking to materially
influence the manner in which information storage practices will be offered
in the future, and they sought to align themselves with RIM Professionals
but we seemingly turned our backs on the opportunity.

They co-located with us in 2004, which provided great advantages to them,
but limited (only a few financial) benefits to us that I could see. They
weren't interested in partnering or joining the Association.  Following
that, we have co-located with them at their conferences, provided speakers
to their other events, and they have continually used references to our
research in their presentations, position papers, and other publications
citing the RIM Profession as a major reason they are "doing what they're
doing", stating our research demonstrates a need for their proposed changes.

A few of us (as individuals) have engaged with them repeatedly and attempted
to influence a change of thinking on their part, explaining to them they are
misquoting information extracted from surveys, taking other findings out of
context, and that some of the position papers they are presenting are
completely incorrect, even to the point of using definitions for terms that
aren't recognized by RIM, and are contrary to the ARMA Glossary.

Two of us have joined a number of their initiative focus groups to ensure we
receive drafts of position papers and presentations, which up until a few
months ago, we would comment on, engage in collaborative discussions with
them on, and in some cases, influence them to modify to more accurately
represent how they impact RIM.  And in many of these cases, we sent copies
of the proposed documents to people in Leadership positions suggesting they
engage them as part of the efforts they are involved in at the Association
Staff and Leadership levels. 

Their insistence to continue on a path to establish their own methods and
procedures for storage of information assets that completely disregard the
principles and practices RIM are based on have the potential of resulting in
lasting concern to our ability to perform our functions as information
custodians.

Unfortunately, our reluctance to engage them and establish a dialog clearly
stating our concerns as a profession with some of the practices they seek to
establish as "standards" may end in us being victims of the results, rather
than participants in the process.   

This is similar to what is bound to happen with the efforts to create
systems for the management of medical and health records in electronic
formats (EMR/EHR), if the RIM Profession fails to become engaged sooner
rather than later. 

It seems to me to be incumbent upon the profession to take a proactive
stance and engage those seeking to change what they aren't familiar with, to
educate them as to why certain practices exist, and to ensure their efforts
are supportive of those practices. 

Larry
[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]