On 4/26/07, Grevin, Frederic <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> So a *partial* solution is to create some sort of "access structure" that
> categorises the schedules in a way that makes sense to the users, and is
> reasonably quick and easy to use. I say *partial* because we still can't
> live with over 500 schedules.
>
> One aspect of this access structure would be to present to the user a
> limited number of choices at any point in the classification process.

Fred is close to the solution that I prefer. Records management
requires examining the what a group does within an organization. Thnk
of the acronym FAT as in Function Activity Transaction. Its in the ISO
standard. What I try to do to is find out what the a group's function
is ie what are they responsible for within the greater scheme of
things. What activities do they perform as part of that function?
Finally what transactions if any occur. I once spent almost 6 months
(off and on) with a group helping them develop a retention schedule
that they I repeat that they could work with. That schedule only had 3
items on it. The hard part was getting them to understand their FATs.

Today's business world moves to fast and changes to quickly to be
constrained by a retention schedule that is overly detailed as to the
records that are created used and maintained by the organization.
Remember records management is not number 1 on their list of things to
do. They don't know records from nuts. What i try to do is to get them
to understand what a record could be. I'll ask "do you create
presentations?" "what is the purpose of the presentation?" "do you
create spreadsheets? why? what purpose do they serve? would you ever
refer back to the spreadsheet.?" as I ask these questions I'll also
ask if they are subject to any sort of laws or regulations. They
generally either know or don' t know. but during the conversations
I'll get ideas as to what if any regulatory agencies they may answer
to.

Rather than one on one meetings i prefer the JAD concept, get everyone
into one room and get them to talking. It is amazing the information
that comes to the surface. For example one group I worked with thought
they knew what records they needed to keep and what they didn't need
to keep, but very quickly examples popped up where the lack of
information had been costly to the company.

there is no one easy solution to how to do retention. What we do need
to remember is that what ever we create it must be something that the
users will gladly incorporate into their work processes, but if the
schedule is too burdensome, too difficult to implement and only
represents the RM view of life then it is doomed to failure.

I firmly believe that records managers are too much down into the
weeds and have lost sight of the forest

anyway those are my thoughts and along with a buck 75 you might get a
cup of joe somewhere

-- 
Peter Kurilecz CRM CA
Richmond, Va

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