RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Maureen cusack <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 3 Mar 2006 13:29:47 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain; format=flowed
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (40 lines)
<many users don't approach classification the same way that records managers 
do,>
<the user has to understand the classification system well enough to know 
how to match the information to that framework.>

Well in a functional classification scheme (which is the way we do it these 
days - ISO 15489) the users, not the records manager, decide in the first 
place how the scheme looks - because the scheme REFLECTS the documented 
approved business processes and the higher level documented approved 
functions of the organization, the scheme doesn't CREATE a way of ordering 
processes and functions. The records manager doesn't set business processes 
nor their relationships to each other nor to top-level function(s) of the 
organization (which are dictated by the organization's mandate). Those 
documenting activities are standard requirements of organizations (ISO 9001) 
- not the records manager's battle. The business process approvers must 
explain these process and function connections to the records manager. This 
means approvers must be high enough up the food chain to understand how all 
activities (for which records are the evidence) "hang together" to support 
the raison d'etre of the organization. Then the records manager creates the 
facets in the scheme to reflect these relationships. This creates the 
context that makes records meaningful (a functional approach means that the 
context is the meaning of records, not the content of individual records 
themselves). The scheme is not hierarchical, it's faceted - exceptions or 
"problems" in grouping records can be handled because facets can be used 
anywhere in the scheme as needed to properly capture context. For example, 
if any given activity or process has it's own HR or finance function then 
those categories are allowed anywhere- they are not strictly contained 
within HR or Finance top-level functions.





Maureen Cusack, M.I.St.

http://www.maureencusack.net

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2