I've always thought that the retention schedule as currently known and used
is a huge missed opportunity and that whilst researching and creating the
conventional schedule it is possible to produce a management tool which
should lie at the heart of the entire RM operation.
Whilst working in the pharmaceutical industry we did exactly that and
produced an Electronic Retention Schedule database to capture and
manipulate not only overall retention periods, but a whole host of
attributes which could be applied at a 'series' level and then used for a
variety of purposes. These included name, description, context,
provenance, local retention, overall retention, location, acceptable
formats, acceptable software and descriptive keywords. Of course by being
fields within a database this overcame the restrictions of having too many
columns on a spreadsheet.
Being a database also meant that we could output the data it contained in a
range of formats suitable for different purposes, ranging from a master
retention schedule providing an overall summary for senior management to
sign off, to a 'departmental retention reference manual'. This being a
central reference guide to every series within each department to aid in
the identification of records and give advice on their description handling
and storage.
The other advantage of being a database was that it allowed us to link this
data to our records management database, central electronic archive and
document management system, auto-populating a range of metadata on entry of
the records series and department of origin and ensuring a consistency of
management wherever the records were stored and regardless of their format.
Anyone interested in finding out more about this could read the piece I
wrote in the ASLIB 'Records Management Journal' Vol 9 No 1 April 1999 -
'The Metadatabase: the future of the retention schedule as a records
management tool'.
Best wishes
Steve
Steve Bailey
Information & Records Manager
JISC
--On 02 March 2005 10:47 +0000 Sarah Westwood <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I think this is a reasonable, indeed a useful request. In our retention
> schedule I've included information about who is the "Owner" of each
> records
> series, so that those who have duplicates (e.g. copies of committee
> minutes) know they can safely dispose of them after a couple of years,
> secure in the knowledge that someone else is keeping a master copy. It
> also helps with information sharing - everyone knows who to ask for copies
> of certain documents.
>
> I used to include a note of the format of the records, to underline that
> retention periods should be applied to digital as well as paper records,
> but in the end took this out for the practical reason that I had too many
> columns in my schedule!
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Sarah Westwood
> Records Management Officer
> Girton College
> Cambridge CB3 0JG
>
> Tel: 01223 338976
> Fax: 01223 338896
> Website: www.girton.cam.ac.uk
>
> --On 01 March 2005 14:53 +0000 Gillian Taylor
> <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Whilst creating recent retention schedules, business colleagues have
>> asked if I could add some extra columns to generic schedules marked long
>> term storage format, location, master record responsibility/handling.
>> Their point was that this would help them use the schedule as a
>> departmental tool for identifying records handling arrangements.
>>
>> Whilst I am very keen to encourage the business areas to use the
>> schedules ina practical way, I have reservations that this would present
>> more risk issues than value e.g. version control/audit issues.
>>
>> Has anyone developed anything similar to the above suggestion or is it a
>> case of STAY AWAY from trying to do too much within one document.
>>
>> I welcome any advice!
>
>
>
> Sarah Westwood
> Records Management Officer
> Girton College
> Cambridge CB3 0JG
>
> Tel: 01223 338976
> Fax: 01223 338896
> Website: www.girton.cam.ac.uk
----------------------
SJ Bailey, Joint Information Systems Committee
[log in to unmask]
|