Debi - what is your goal? Is it to apply retention to specific records/data
in active databases? Is it to reduce server storage/application maintenance
cost? Is it to archive inactive legacy databases? Is it all of these?

Each of these goals may require a different approach. Archiving SAP data,
for example, can be done utilizing their archiving tool - here the challenge
is identifying the data elements comprising the record, identifying the
relational elements that may need to be maintained to ensure ongoing system
integrity,  identifying the associated retention requirements, and
determining disposition processes. The data is moved to a lower tier storage
system, in a more compressed format, but is still available through the SAP
interface. On the other hand,  a legacy database may simply require storage
in a compressed backup format in a secure folder on a "records center" drive
- no special tools required. This data, like any other inactive record, may
only require a relatively simple recovery process that IT can manage - not
instantaneous, but sufficient for an inactive record.

IT adds value by managing technology. Records Management adds value by
managing content - in a database structure, for example, by identifying
content and tracking provenance through organizational change, identifying
and maintaining disposition authority, addressing preservation when needed,
identifying retention, managing disposition, initiating recovery when
needed, etc... In my experience, these are not areas that IT excels in. Its
not their job. I wouldn't at all be surprised to find that your IT partners
don't know who "owns" what database, particularly if you work in a large,
multi-department organization like ours. We've added value in many cases
simply by analyzing the data, and identifying appropriate custodianship,
then managing disposition in conjunction with those records custodians.

I would clarify with IT the type of data/application structures you are
talking about, where you can each add value/align goals, then develop a set
of requirements to meet those goals. I would not assume, for example, that
instant recovery, or even maintaining active access, is necessary or even
desirable for certain types of data. I do know that maintaining such access
increases the cost of on-going maintenance and may undermine potential cost
savings. Such access makes sense in a system like SAP, which offers tools to
archive in such a manner - and maintains financial data that is often active
due to the need to perform long range trend analysis. It may make no sense
in other legacy data systems, and you may be setting a requirement that will
undermine long term cost sustainability.

-- 
Dwight Wallis, CRM
Multnomah County Records Management Program
1620 SE 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
ph: (503)988-3741
fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]

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]