Jesse,
A quick Friday-type response....
First your comment, then a response.....
>I have yet to meet many in the RM community (CIOs, RM Department heads,
>etc.) who have any ability to determine how to manage electronic
records >and the systems that produce them, as it is increasingly
difficult to
>distinguish between the two - think a) instant messaging, b) Web
content
>management systems, c) blogs.
Ok, perhaps you need to meet a few more Records Managers...... Several
have or are implementing systems designed to manage email records. Many
have responsibility for managing other electronic records - especially
those contained in ECM and BPM systems. As for Instant Messages, Web
Content systems, and blogs....who in any discipline is doing such a hot
job of managing those right now? I'd love to hear of any IT folks who
are doing a good job in those areas....and are fully embracing RM
concepts.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>RM types in general terms (not all, but many)fail to understand those
>situations that arise that have an impact on the
>system performance and stability (i.e. legal holds, audit holds,
technology
>refreshes, requirements for system migration and retirement, the
dynamic
>nature of almost all software- and server-based systems, etc.)
RM types think in "general terms"? To the best of my 30-years of
experience "RM types" focus on very specific needs and requirements.
However, for any of us to engage in what we might call "glittering
generalities" could be a bit dangerous here. By the way, I've yet to
find very many IT-types (if you'd want to call them that) who really
focus on long-term system migration issues.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>I think this statement has just as much validity as Doug's - and I
think
>this is where we too often get into trouble between IT and RM - and
frankly
>between the business and RM (and between the business and IT too. As an
>aside, read any magazine that caters to CIOs, including CIO, CIO
Decisions,
>Baseline, and Optimize since, oh, 2000 or so and you'll see a litany of
>stories about how IT doesn't get it and operates in a vacuum and
doesn't
>consider all the business challenges like profitability etc. etc. etc.
But >I digress).
Perhaps the focus here....in this discussion, Jesse should be more on
collaboration rather than on a divisive question about WHICH group is
better suited to managing electronic records. Perhaps a better question
that you might have asked would have been..... "How can Records Managers
and IT Managers ensure that they understand one another's particular
discipline and improve on the management of electronic records".......
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>Peter said: <snip>
>sorry but in my experience very few IT types understand RM nor do they
>want
>to. let's not forget that IT is the group that has said for years "well
we
>can just keep everything, storage is cheap" Ask Morgan-Stanley who they
now
>want in charge?....IT in my experience can't tell the difference
between
>backup tapes and retention tapes</snip>
>I paraphrase again:
>In my experience very few RM types understand IT nor do they want to.
Let's
>not forget that many RM types are MLIS types that have said for years
"we
>have to create classes, types, and series for every different kind of
>record
>even if that results in 1400 (or more!) buckets that no user can
understand
>and even RM finds hard to keep straight....RM in my experience can't
tell
>the difference between potential records files and system files
(another
>exercise: Do an inventory of a laptop. Mine has 875,000+ files on it;
how
>many of you know whether or not the following file types could be
business
>records: .dll .bat .com .hlp? Short answer is probably none of them
unless
> you're a software company as all of these are system files).
There are a number of different reasons why "RM Types" may not
understand IT. In some cases, individual Records Managers do need
additional education and training - many seek such opportunities now.
In other cases, "RM types" have been intentionally excluded from IT
discussions by IT itself.... I've seen that on a first-hand basis on
occasion.
It sounds like your experience perhaps has been with Records Managers
who are not among the best. However, generalizing that RM "types" can't
tell the difference between potential records files and system files
could prove a bit dangerous for you. Many DO understand the
differences. I'd not sell the knowledge and ability of RM Types short
without knowing them on a more individual basis.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>In case it isn't clear, I don't subscribe to the points of view I
expressed
>above in my rephrasings. But I absolutely don't comprehend, whether
from >RM,IT, or someone else, this idea that the other side doesn't "get
it" and >that *we* are the only keepers of the holy writ.
Ok, if you don't subscribe to any of the points of view that you have
expressed, what points of view do you subscribe to..... Many of us here
are responding to YOUR question...... If the question was divisive in
nature, should you be surprised that the responses might be as well?
Like I indicated before, perhaps the better question would be one that
we on the ARMA Board discuss rather frequently...... "How can IT and RM
work together to understand one another's disciplines and to advance the
cause of the management of electronic records?"
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
>My point was primarily that the idea that IT is somehow differently
wired >at the DNA level and can never get RM is as legitimate as saying
that RM >is,too, and can never understand how to manage electronic
information
>effectively - but how many of you would admit that? Some of you may in
fact
>believe it (I don't) - and others of you may think that it's somehow
>different when it's RM we're talking about (I don't).
>I do think RM can "get" IT, or at least enough of it to manage records
>according to content and regardless of media or format. But IT folks
are
>pretty smart too, and if they are introduced to an equivalent level of
>information, they can "get" RM to the exact same level as you, my RM
>professionals, "get" IT.
So, based on the above why not ask the better question?
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
|
