RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date:
Fri, 15 Apr 2016 09:51:39 +0000
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
"Serra Serra, Jordi" <[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
8bit
In-Reply-To:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
Really interesting question. I think that the BCS is the axis of a functional records management system, around which orbit a constellation of rules, basically acces rules (use, reuse, etc.) and retention rules (destruction, transfer, migration, etc.). From my point of view, a retention schedule must be always joined to one class of the BCS (essentialy at activity/process level), because the rationale of a retention rule comes from the context (legal, functional and operational context) of an activity or process. One BCS class could be related to more than one retention rule, depending on the different stages of the lifecycle and the different nature of records generated by the activity.

Another question is the systematization of retention actions. Usually records managers define rule patterns when several retention schedules use the same disposal or preservation actions, timelines, etc. But I don't see that to be really rules, but just patterns of rules. It's a little like the big buckets approach.

Thanks for starting this interesting debate, and wishing for reading other opinions.

Kind regards,


Jordi Serra Serra
http://bd.ub.edu/pub/serra/
http://www.mgdie.net/en/

-----Missatge original-----
De: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] En nom de Libby Z Sutcliffe
Enviat: divendres, 15 / abril / 2016 07:17
Per a: [log in to unmask]
Tema: Hello

Hello everyone,

Well it's been many years since I've been on this list and I now find myself back in the land of Records Management, rather than a purely eDRMS Sys Admin role.  I expect that there will be a lot of familiar names crop up in my inbox!

I have one question which I can't seem to find an answer to on the great Interweb...

I am currently reviewing two BCS structures with a view to amalgamating them and I am wondering why I am bothering at all.

We have a number of fully approved R&D Schedules which are Function/Activity based and I think we should really just be using these to classify our records.  Is there any reason why we would have a BCS which has different Function/Activity sets to the schedules which we then have to go through the arduous task of mapping?

I may be missing something rather fundamental, but I can't see what it might be.

Many thanks in advance for your help.

Libby


Libby Sutcliffe
Business Analyst | IRIS Project
Governance Branch | Department of Transport and Main Roads Floor 7 | Capital Hill | 85 George Street | Brisbane Qld 4000 GPO Box 1549 | Brisbane Qld 4001

Ph: (07) 306 69651    Mob: 0437 496 612
E: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
W: www.tmr.qld.gov.au<http://www.tmr.qld.gov.au/>



***********************************************************************WARNING: This email (including any attachments) may contain legallyprivileged, confidential or private information and may be protected bycopyright. You may only use it if you are the person(s) it wasintended to be sent to and if you use it in an authorised way. No oneis allowed to use, review, alter, transmit, disclose, distribute, printor copy this email without appropriate authority.If this email was not intended for you and was sent to you by mistake,please telephone or email me immediately, destroy any hardcopies ofthis email and delete it and any copies of it from your computersystem. Any right which the sender may have under copyright law, and any legal privilege and confidentiality attached to this email is notwaived or destroyed by that mistake.It is your responsibility to ensure that this email does not contain and is not affected by computer viruses, defects or interference by third parties or replication problems (including incompatibility withyour computer system).Opinions contained in this email do not necessarily reflect theopinions of the Department of Transport and Main Roads,or endorsed organisations utilising the same infrastructure.***********************************************************************

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]

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