Not to really "jump on Jesse's question" and not intending to go into
attack mode....... This is a pretty loaded question for the listsev
audience. Jesse, were you really intending to toss this hand grenade
into the mix on a Friday afternoon????
I have yet to meet many in the IT community (CIOs, IT Department heads,
etc.) who have any ability to determine how to classify records, either
electronic or paper. IT types in general terms (not all, but many)fail
to understand those situations that arise that have an impact on
retention (i.e. legal holds, audit holds, event-driven retention
periods, etc.)
The obvious response is RM. Jesse, I'd be interested in hearing which
group YOU think should make such decisions.....
Douglas P. Allen, CRM, CDIA+
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Jesse Wilkins
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 2:45 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] WAS: CIO adds RM NOW: Convergence of RM and IT
I would only add that I am by nature and by nurture an IT guy. That's
why I
like all the shiny flashy spinny techie things like blogs, wikis, RSS,
nano-bio-opto-molecular timeshifting portals, and the like. But I like
to
think I can "do RM" most days, and I know at least a couple other fellow
bitheads who are also CRMs and who hang out on the list - c'mon, don't
be
shy, you can come out of the datacenter....
To demonstrate the difficulty of separating the two, here's an exercise
for
the list:
Who should have day-to-day responsibility for the declaration and
management
of email messages as records? IT or RM?
Discuss.
Regards,
Jesse Wilkins
CDIA+, LIT, ICP, edp, ermm, ecms
IMERGE Consulting
[log in to unmask]
Yahoo! IM: jessewilkins8511
(303) 574-1455 office
(303) 484-4142 fax
Looking for the latest education on electronic records, email, and
imaging?
Visit http://www.imergeconsult.com/schedule2.html for a current schedule
of
courses.
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf
Of Colgan, Julie J.
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 12:03 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] WAS: CIO adds RM NOW: Convergence of RM and IT
Ok, now Larry, I can't let you "out" my apparent schizophrenia without
rebuttal, now can I? :)
I disagree that my first statement isn't supported by my second. I do
support IT folks learning about, and gaining competency in, RM, however
not as a path to do RM - rather to be better prepared to communicate
with RMs (and I think the same goes for RMs gaining knowledge in IT and
look forward to ARMA's Competency workproduct).
My point is that I hope the Feds approach this from the standpoint of
fostering collaboration, rather than trying to turn IT people into RMs.
The reason being is the IT folks tend to approach problem solving from a
different perspective than RMs, even when armed with RM concepts and
understanding. I think this is similar to your statement that IT and RM
should have the same reporting path yet remain separate.
I'll add that I haven't yet looked at pages 6 or 7 as you suggested so
I'm not sure if I might be missing your point a bit.
Okay, that's it for me today. Thanks for letting me eat up some of your
bandwidth!
Julie
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
