The paper I'm referring to has been sent to an Official Repository or
should have been.
The Working Files I'm referring to would be copies or drafts of those
records.

I don't know what native format you're referring to but just about
everything created today in a normal office has come from an electronic
source.  Exception being paper forms that are completed manually.  Lab
Books would be another exception.

Using established, legally researched retention schedules the retention
periods would be applied to all media
The exception here being Paper Conversion to an Archive media +2 years.
 After I've place paper on film I would then dispose of the paper and
keep the film for the full length of the retention.  It's that old Best
Evidence Rule !

If the paper records being retained are available in an Electronic
Repository, say for example Documentum, do you still believe you should
keep the paper for retrievals or perhaps get training on how to access
the electronic version.

I understand the concept of corporate culture and agree this plays into
the what's, whereas and whys.  However I'm faced with the issue at hand
which is the glut of unnecessary paper records being stored and will
address additional RM theories and concepts at a later date.

I appreciate your response and perhaps if you have hard data that would
help with a File Clean-up program you could share that as well.



Barry Malone
Mgr Global R&D Records Management
500 Arcola Road
Collegeville Pa. 19426
Maildrop A1108G
484-865-2345
Fax 484-865-9271
[log in to unmask]

>>> [log in to unmask] 11/2/2004 1:05:35 PM >>>

At 12:24 PM 11/2/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>A point of clarification I'm not implying it's a good thing to manage
>paper.  The basis for my initial inquiry and follow-up information
was
>to build a case for not keeping file cabinets full of paper working
>files.

Well, as a clarification to this clarification, IF you elect to retain
your
records in paper form, then it IS A GOOD THING to manage your paper
records =)

And there ARE legitimate cases for keeping working files in paper
form,
especially if that's the native form you develop them in.  Many
"working
files" are transitory in nature, having a business need of less than 3
years and depending on the volume you generate and how you need to
retrieve
them for use it may not be worth the labor, cost and effort to convert
them
to a digital form for management.

Factors that would impact your decision would include those related to
retrieval and use patterns (frequency, rapidity, randomness or by
multiple
users in disparate locations) and how long you need to retain the
files.

>I'm preparing an all out blitz in 1Q 2005 to have departments review
>and appropriately apply disposition to information in paper as well
as
>other transportable media. (ie micrographics, CDs etc.)

Keep in mind, ANY retention schedule and RIM Program should be based
on
content, not media, form or format... so I'd approach this from a
little
different angle than considering the media form first as a part of
your
"blitz".  If you have a retention schedule already, great... if not,
perform an inventory, identify who produces (and who uses) what, how
it's
filed (paper or electronic) and how it's backed up (copies, servers or
removable media) and then determine the legal, statutory and
regulatory
requirements for keeping it, THEN identify the business need for the
information and if it exceeds the required retentions, add that in.

Also, if you have an organizational archive, discuss with them items
that
may be of enduring or intrinsic value to the organization, and if you
DON'T
find out if someone thinks it might be a good idea to establish (and
fund)
one.  Add a notation into the retention schedule against these items
and
make sure that prior to destruction they're offered to the archives
for
appraisal.

>Numbers usually present a nice visual as oppose to text - "We need to
>reduce our dependence on paper, please apply the appropriate
disposition
>to your files."   Why?  What's in it for me?  Why does it benefit the
>company?

I still think you may be going about this the wrong way... the volume
of
the material you're currently maintaining shouldn't be the "key factor"
in
determining the need to do something.  Maybe your organization is
paper
intensive for a reason... you might need to take a step back and
examine
the organizational culture and find out WHY things are done the way
they
are first.  If you have a lot of "form intensive" processes or you do a
lot
of work with clients that aren't embracing electronic processes, then
you
may be bound by some of this.

Also, if your organization isn't ready to make a lot of capital
expenditures for hardware, software, communications systems and isn't
willing to commit funds to the long-term maintenance, including costs
of
conversion and migration of images over time, then maybe paper is the
way
they'd prefer to go.  And don't forget training... as you build these
systems, EVERYONE needs to be trained as to how to apply metadata to
the
documents, records and files being put into the system.  A certain
amount
of this can be automated, but classification schemes and taxonomy take
time
and money to build as well.  Maybe they've decided that presently,
storing
paper and hiring file clerks is cheaper for them.

>Perhaps this very basic topic doesn't fit the current trend of
>discussing the management of electronic files.
>What I know is the electronic systems that have been put in place as
>official repositories generate volumes of paper.

It's not too basic, it's one of the building blocks of a RIM
Program.  There are many organizations that have hybrid systems,
managing a
portion of their records in paper form, a portion as images converted
from
paper (supported by an index and EDMS) and another portion as
native-form
produced electronically.  And there are organizations that still manage
a
portion of their records on microfilm, especially those who have
extremely
long-term retention requirements or want to have a deep archive of
critical
or vital records.

Larry

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance