It is worth noting that it is technically possible for IT departments to
require classification prior to delivery outgoing email (and prior to
"filing" on a server). While I understand the motivation to get as much out
of technology as possible, I have to say that this is a policy matter first.  

Many organizations are woefully incapable of tackling the issue and in the
face of that (donning my armour)  I see records managers looking to IT to
solve a problem that is more related to organizational culture, leadership
and management.

It seems that if a policy is developed, this becomes (the dreaded and
despised) regulation.  Hiding that rule inside a product relieves the
organization of responsibility for its own conscious decisions and masks
reality in favour of a more popular view that there's no rule, just
"functionality".  It let's people conclude there is no regulation when there
is, sadly buried in the RIM department. Hidden in this way, it also makes
sensible regulation vulnerable to  change (with unclear RIM
implications--not of them good) when new players replace one system with
another. 

On a larger scale, we see this played out in the events of the day.  Maybe
we need some RIM activism to illuminate the role of records and
evidence-based practice when the latest crisis hits the news.  Of course, it
does seem that there's a high demand for transparency with a low tolerance
for creating and managing the foundation of transparency: records. 

I would like to see our professional associations (internationally) making
the equation clear so that solving "local" challenges like emails fits
within a broader, societal context.  On that note, I would welcome (in a
separate thread) dialogue about the big issues related to the role of
regulation and records, lack of attention to records in the "speculative
media" we call news, etc.  

A last point is to observe that the major software products fit the market,
generally.  Buying a product can mean that you have bought underpinnings
that are based on a market that is not your own.  As the majority of list
members are from the USA, this may not be an obvious point.  However, when
working to build support for selection and procurement of a product abroad,
it can be necessary to develop a deep understanding of functionality from
the perspective of international legal implications, privacy and other
matters that are not typically reflected out of the box and may actually
require customization--not configuration--to address.  

My own wish list for companies developing EDRMS capable software is that a
fully capable functionality be delivered with configuration to the client
environment taking care of the rest.  We should not have to undergo a higher
cost customization to fit a product to an RIM program, IMO.

John

John James O'Brien, CRM, MALT
Partner & Managing Director, IRM Strategies
[log in to unmask]
Skype: irm-strategies-john-obrien
On assignment in Canada

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]