All,
This has been a great discussion and I've enjoyed reading the thread. Jesse, you make a lot of good points. I am going to try and summarize a bit... Why do we need store electronic or paper in file plans when we can store them in "big buckets" and capture the important metadata and associate it to the record. I thought about RM practices and if I agree. Applying holds, applying retention, dispostion, discovery, etc all would work, I believe.
The only thing I have is "How does the metadata get applied?". I have implemented ERM systems at multiple companies. Usually a filing profile is used to put a record into the record series in the ERMS. The filing profile has defaulted metadata associated with it. This minimizes the amount of work a user has to do to enter the record into the system. From my experience, users want to capture a lot of metadata but don't want to enter it all.
I guess you could still use multiple filing profiles into the big buckets, but then why not keep a more detailed file plan. You could then narrow the scope of searches, narrow the scope of holds, etc.
Just some thoughts... please respond.
Jon Cohen
Rusco, Inc.
www.ruscoservices.com
267-261-2698
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On
Behalf Of Jesse Wilkins
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2007 9:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Metadata Was Bucket Theory
Hi Ginny,
Not sure I understand this comment - after all, at the end of the day a file
plan and a RRS each are an attempt to provide metadata to paper documents.
Where's it located? How long should we keep it for? What do we do with it at
the end of that time? Is it on legal hold? Is it a vital record?
All of those can be metadata fields; but in addition, we can note that it
has these other certain characteristics so that later on we can, for
example, retrieve easily all documents relating to a particular office,
party, or transaction type. Yes, those are fields that are purposely
designed; but they increase the findability of information exponentially
which goes to the heart of the entire electronic records and information
management challenge.
Note also that I and others want full-text indexing as well. So if you look
at
- The full-text index of the document
- The system-generated metadata (it's a TIFF, it was created Jan 1 2007)
- The user- or process-generated metadata (it's an invoice, it's from Jesse
Wilkins, it was scanned by Jane Smith on Jan 1 2007)
That's a lot of information available for finding electronic documents,
which in my opinion reduces the need for so many buckets that are used to
find stuff. Again, I recommend everyone read Everything is Eventual by David
Weinberger for some excellent examples of the limitations of the traditional
hierarchical "a bucket for everything and everything in its own particular
specialized bucket" approach.
Jesse Wilkins
[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]
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]
|