On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 7:15 AM, Roach, Bill <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>
> Sorry I have to disagree.  I have used retention schedules as the basis
> for file structures since I started in RM.  It seemed logical at the time
> and has worked well ever since. One of the things I like most about it is
> that it enables users to logically store their content in a structure that
> meets their needs and enables the disposal of information when the
> retention timeframe expires.  Additionally, users have been very quick to
> pick up on the structure as the retention schedule is structured to follow
> the functional business structures of the organization.
>

Music to my ears.  Was wondering how long it would take for someone to make
sense of this. Naturally, it's someone who has had similar exposure in a
variety of industries.

If you have a retention schedule that is "functional" rather than
"organizational" and it touches functions that cross organizational lines,
to use this as your file plan as well is not only logical, but it supports
culling older files for transmittal to your record center, either on or off
site. Additionally, it simplifies placing destruction holds on records and
performing disposals based on retention periods being met on stored records.

Larry
[log in to unmask]

-- 
*Lawrence J. Medina
Danville, CA
RIM Professional since 1972*

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]