<The Archivist would be correct in saying that the historical chrono files
should be maintained as a permanent record.>

Sorry but I don't understand why a chrono file is as historically
significant than the same records in the context of their functions and
activities. Typically chrono files are duplicates of what already exists.
Can you explain why?

Barbara Towell

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of cflynn
Sent: November 9, 2005 2:28 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: University RM Question


Wow! Archival theory questions here, who would have thunk it?

The Archivist would be correct in saying that the historical chrono files
should be maintained as a permanent record. However, it is not the job of
the Archivist to tell operations how to function. The Archivist might lament
the loss of such a historically valuable resource. If the process no longer
exists or is significantly altered, the Archivist should document/records
the change.

I suggest you determine the best business solution for your operation.
Measure your needs against the administrative, fiscal, leagal, and yes even
the historical values. The historical (Archival) value will in most cases
apply to the preservation of a record not the requirement to generate it.

I think your Archivist mught be overstepping their bounds a bit. Although,
as an Archivist, I find it interesting that one should step to the front
line and take an active role.

Chris Flynn

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of Leslie Knoblauch
Sent: Wednesday, November 09, 2005 6:26 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: University RM Question

Hello,
I am the first Records Manager at a small private college. I have been
conducting preliminary records surveys of the top administrative offices. In
my interviews/surveys the office staff has told me that they want to cut
down on the duplication of records stemming from them using a chron file to
hold correspondence and then also adding copies of this same correspondence
to the much larger and more heavily used subject file. They have let me know
that they do not find chron files easy to use, especially for new staff, and
are looking at phasing them out. My initial thought was that they should do
away with the chron file and stick to using their subject files but the
university archives disagrees. What would you recommend in this situation?
Should I recommend that office staff continue to use two systems, one that
they find very difficult to use efficiently so that the archives can
document the history of their office more thoroughly or should I support the
offices transition away from chron files?

Any advice would be appreciated,
LK

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

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