I agree with Peter:

 

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.

 

and with Fred:

 

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. 

 

 

I've been using this approach to developing retention schedules for
twenty years and this is, I think, a good illustration of it - the most
recent edition of a function-based high-level retention schedule for UK
higher education institutions http://vle.causeway.ac.uk/jisc_he/
Individual institutions can use these 'big buckets' as they are or
segment them into smaller 'buckets' to meet their specific needs.

 

 

 

 

Elizabeth Parker

Director & Principal Consultant

Emmerson Consulting Limited

Poplar House

5 School Street

Witton-Le-Wear

County Durham

DL14 0AS

 

Office:   01388 488865

Mobile:  07932 744778

 

 

This e-mail message is confidential and is intended solely for the use
of the addressee.  If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure,
copying, distribution or use of it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
If you have received it in error, please notify the sender immediately
and delete it from your system.

 

Emmerson Consulting Limited is registered in England No. 3607347

Registered Office: 140 Coniscliffe Road, Darlington, County Durham, DL3
7RT

 

 

-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
Behalf Of Peter Kurilecz
Sent: 27 April 2007 00:37
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: RAINdrip: SNIA and the IT Community has an epiphany!!!

 

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


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