My main question would be "what authority" could a records manager have
over the Secretary of State if she wanted to do things differently?  And
then, how can enforcement of the rules be imposed before something like
this happens again?

Not coming down on any side--just saying, *authority & responsibility* have
to go hand in hand.  A records manager may not have the clout to require
someone in that position (Secretary of State) to adhere to the rules.  If
not, what chain of command would be followed by the records manager to get
someone with enough clout to enforce the rules early on?  Is it reported to
NARA and then up the chain of command until the CRO or Archivist must
become involved?

Obviously no one wants that scenario either (reporting that someone in that
position was not following the rules), so how could the system be changed
to require all federal employees, regardless of rank, to use government
provided technology that automatically archives all messages from day one?

Pat

__________________________________________________________________

Patricia C. Franks, PhD, CA, CRM, IGP
MARA Program Coordinator
Professor, School of Information
San Jose State University
San Jose, CA, USA
http://ischoolapps.sjsu.edu/facultypages/view.php?fac=franksp
https://ischool.sjsu.edu/programs/master-archives-records-administration-mara

On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 9:49 AM, Walsh, Mark <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Johna -
>


> <<Federal government department records managers are the ones usually
> responsible for enforcing retention schedules and transfers to NARA, among
> other duties.  It remains to be seen in the case at hand what, if any, role
> the State Department Records Manager had...>>
>

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]