RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Glenn Sanders <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:46:25 +1100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (31 lines)
Fred is right, it depends on the risk for each group of documents scanned.
NSW State Records guidelines repeat this message, and suggest that for very
large batches, 5 - 10% is ok.

see
http://www.records.nsw.gov.au/recordkeeping/government-recordkeeping-manual/guidance/recordkeeping-in-brief/recordkeeping-in-brief-11

My experience is that if you are sensible and get your scanning done by a
commercial bureau, QA is self limiting, as the costs are directly related
to staff time, so the more QA the higher the unit cost. If you do it in
house it's only funny money, and besides, they are only records staff so it
doesn't really matter . . . (joke).

Cheers

Glenn

Glenn Sanders
[log in to unmask]
Australia
0407 187 333
These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked and
they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Harry Peck and Co and Glenn".
Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2