Sharing a link on notetaking with my added contextual comments in the RM,
archival, and long term (ultimate end) user context.  Speaking for myself,
of  course.  Rebecca Ruiz quotes from a former FBI official in an article,
"Comey's Memos Were a Product of a Culture of Note-Taking."
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/17/us/politics/james-comey-memos-fbi-culture.html?ref=politics
That official, Lauren C. Anderson, refers to a culture of contemporaneous
notetaking at the FBI which stems from the agency's particular mission.

The rest of the article is beyond the scope of my message. But the issue of
notetaking is not because cultural competence is a key part of
understanding Federal records issues.  Agencies and departments are not
monolithic.

This is why prescriptive templates, especially ones stemming from "fault
finding" rather than empathetic solution-finding, rarely work.  In fact,
they can actually become stressers, for which inability to air them out
publicly with any degree of candor adds to the challenges of formulating
external communications strategies within agencies and departments.

Some agencies and departments still value notetaking in permanently
valuable or long term retention records series although in most agencies
taking notes increasingly is rare.  (Where it is on that spectrum depends
on the mission and assessment of functional risks within any particular
agency or department.  And even within offices or among ranks within an
organization.)

As I observed in a blog post last month, "No two agencies or departments
are exactly alike.  Whether they have historians on staff or not, all
governmental components have histories. They affect their missions, values,
how they create and handle and, most importantly, assess risk in records."
https://archivalexplorations.wordpress.com/2017/05/03/archivists-librarians-information-professionals/

On the other end of the Federal spectrum from ones where notetaking still
is valued are agencies where, as John Earl Haynes said in 2003,
"Pre-emptive sanitization of the record is not episodic but nearly
universal among policy making officials and their staffs.”

Historians such as the late Eduard Mark of the Air Force pointed to an
increase in knowledge gaps as early as 15 years ago.  Some gaps have
technological causes, others cultural, some a complex mix of the two.
Mitigation at first recognition of cause and effect (had recognizing its
existence been more widespread) might have had a small impact at the start
of the 21st century but largely did not occur then.  The mitigation would
have to have been exquisitely culturally sensitive, of course.

Relatedly, Jason Grumet observed in a 2014 op ed that "Most government
staff now operate under the principle of 'don’t write that down' and avoid
raising concerns and challenging questions altogether for fear that they
will be publicly revealed to embarrassing effect."

If you're willing to look beyond the performative aspects sometimes seen in
"records management theater" to consider risk assessment at its hardest
(hence often avoided) but deepest, bravest levels, you can see and
understand the cultural impact on record keeping of one of my favorite
phrases--"it depends."

Maarja
[log in to unmask]
@ArchivesMaarja
Blog:  Archival Explorations <https://archivalexplorations.wordpress.com/>
Washington, DC

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]