I concur with both Elizabeth and Bruce. Reconciliation (in both senses
of the term) is a great thing.

Fred
===================================================================
Frederic J. Grevin
Email: [log in to unmask]
Phone: 212.788.8615
 

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of A.S.E. Fairfax
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 18:56
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] RM vs. IM

Ah, perhaps I was unclear.

Multiple copies of a commercial publication are not records they are
just
that publications. A phone book issued  or sold by say, Qwest or
Verizon, a
commercial entity,  to an entity not themselves, public or private, is a
publication, a product, and has no record value unless it is regarded as
an
artifactual/archival record, such as a historical society might. But for
Qwest or Verizon itself, an original first run example of this
publication
or the next instance of publication is archival and would be/should be
scheduled as a record within that organization. 

Likewise,  in government and in large private companies,  we issue
internal
phone directories, and these provide evidence of who worked where, when.
They have historical value to the agency, and possibly to outside
entitites
as well.  The original, record copy of these, is a record in the office
responsible for issuing it. Distributed copies are publications, which
may
be made available for sale as product or freely issued, and are not
records
in ond of themselves unless it is the last remaining example. These of
course, are not standard commercial telephone directories, but the same
relationship of publisher to publication exists.

The office of record is a key premise here.  Who has responsibility for
this
entity?  Are there any legal, fiscal, administrative, or historical
considerations to retain it? Does it document a person, process or
entity
important to the organization or provide evidence of the accountability,
product and workings of the office of record or the organization itself?
Then, depending on what definition you have assigned to "record" or
"information" the issue of whether it is a record of publication or a
publication itself is pertinent.  If it is a record, it may or may not
have
any legal requirements ordering its retention.

Private companies often find that internal archives make good use of
such
examples of old phone directories kept by the issuing office for
marketing
exhibits and display purposes documenting the growth of the business. 

But one must make a distinction between the distributed publication
copies
(product) and the record of publication which may look exactly the same.
This is usually done most easily by identifying the office of record. If
it
is a purchased publication you have no obligation to keep it beyond the
useful life of the product.

Elizabeth Fairfax. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Bruce White [mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
Sent: Thursday, November 29, 2007 3:06 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: [RM] RM vs. IM

On 11/29/07, Grevin, Fred <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> As you say, Elizabeth, the ORIGINAL COPY of a standard commercial
> telephone directory might be considered a record, and archives and
historical
> societies certainly have need for keeping telephone directories, but
the
run-of-the
> -mill organisation, public-sector or private, does not, and would not
consider a
> standard commercial telephone directory a record.

> And A.S.E. Fairfax replied:
> In fact, it would and does qualify as a record.  Many organizations
and
> certainly government regard phone books as archival records.  Many
archival
> records as you know have informational value that has nothing to do
with
the
> reason the record was created in the first place.  Phone
books/directories
> are happily preserved by many historical and genealogical societies,
and
> many archives.

I have to agree with Fred.  As the records manager for a private
company, I consider the telephone book as nothing more than reference
material.  When a new one is issued (typically annually), the old ones
are tossed in the recycling bin.  If I need another one, I'll contact
the organization that issues it.  No need for my company to maintain
it any longer.

I can apply this philosophy to many state and local government
entities (I have also worked for a couple) as well.   If the entity is
a historical agency such as the Texas State Library or maybe the
Library of Virginia, that's a different story.  They probably should
be retaining these, whether published by a government entity or
private firm for the reasons discussed.

But for most organizations, especially those of us in private sector,
they don't qualify as a record, IMHO.

-- 
Bruce L. White, CRM, PMP
Houston, TX
e-mail: [log in to unmask]
RIM Professional since sometime in the 80's

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]