I'm with BobD. ISO standards are best left as best practice, specific
groups, organisations, companies etc can decide how far they will go to
mandate them in their area of control. For example, NSW State Records has
standards, derived heavilly from ISO 15489 and its Australian predecessor.
State Records standards are mandatory for all NSW Government
organisations, and State Records does audits, compliance surveys etc.  But
it is SR standards, not ISO 15489.

The sanction under the State Records Act is to be reported to State
Parliament (which might seem to be a limp slap across the wrist, but our
CEO does NOT like being named in parliament and tends to spread the pain
around). The other sanction is, as someone else said, to be caught up in
the courts or by one of the regulators - I could imagine an opposition
lawyer or investigator finding a report to parliament about RM
discrepancies a really good place to start grilling.

But I know of no practical way in our legal / constitutional system here
where compliance with ISO 15489 could be mandated generically. It would be
extremely counter productive for RM.

Mind you, I could be interested in being national RM compliance manager /
enforcer. Imagine, everyone in Australia forced to do it my way. No folio
numbering  . . . .

Cheers

Glenn

Glenn Sanders MRMA
[log in to unmask]
[log in to unmask]
Australia

These views are mine alone. They may or may not be those of any
previous or present employers or clients. I don't know. If I'd asked
and they'd agreed, I would have signed it "Bloggs and Co and
Glenn". Or whatever. But I haven't, so I didn't.

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