I think Carol is 100% correct.  The compliance argument holds very little water because the odds of being caught are low and the sanctions not sufficient for managers to pay much attention.   Marketing is crucial but getting metrics on the cost of NOT managing records properly is what we really need.  Where are these metrics?  All I've been able to gather are folk tales (e.g. "I think Gartner said sometime ago...") without proper referencing. 
 
Hard evidence I was able to gather at one institution on the cost of trawling through e-mail backup tapes for one year for a potential FOI/DPA enquiry (£80,000 not counting staff costs) didn't cut any ice with management.  I also tried working out how much commercial storage of our paper would cost as an incentive to destroy obsolete files and the potential savings were so low in terms of the overall budget as to not be worth bothering about.  So no-one did.  E-storage costs (by which I mean the costs of looking for, finding, assessing and being sure that the information found is authentic and reliable) are of course hidden from the average manager so there is even less concern.
 
We need to talk in terms of many many many thousands and even millions (or at least enough to justify our annual salaries as records managers).  For example, if anyone can prove beyond all doubt the oft repeated statement that the average knowledge worker wastes 2 hours per week trying to find information then I can prove that good recordkeeping rules (which, whatever Steve says, will enhance retrieval by getting rid of mounds of rubbish/duplicate information and making the important stuff easier to find by sensible document naming/classification/indexing/whatever) will save my organisation £600,000 p.a. and thus keep my job (because I sure as hell don't earn that much!). 
 
Clare
 
Clare Cowling
Records Manager
Solicitors Regulation Authority
Ipsley Court
Berrington Close
Redditch B98 0TD

Ph: direct line 01527 512926
Internal extension: 3996
Mobile 07816 929734
Fax: 0152 7883285
email [log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: The UK Records Management mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Carol Scott
Sent: 25 July 2008 10:29
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: How successful has RM been? (was RE: Comparative definitions of Classification and Taxonomy)

Hi All
I think the problems go beyond 'marketing' but rather are our professions inability to adequately describe and quantify real business benefits from IM and RM disciplines.  (witness all the plaintive cries for business cases on this list when members have the un-lovely task for cost justifying an EDRMS).  Compliance arguments -(such as those driven out of FOI ) are not of sufficient priority for beleaguered senior managers juggling shrinking budgets and increased demands for services - unless of course there has been some public failure of information governance that has resulted in bad publicity that the CEO has to front.
 
How do we improve our ability as a profession to describe and quantify our contribution to improved customer service, system design, and other efficiency gains?  I think these need to be cold hard cash benefits rather than the soft 'enabling' kinds of arguments that we have often made.
   
 
Carol Scott
Metataxis Limited
+44 (0)77 25981076
carol.scott@metataxis.com
www.metataxis.com
Designing the Information-Centric Environment
 
Registered in England and Wales, Company Number 4356463
Registered Address: 53 Cavendish Road, London SW12 0BL

From: The UK Records Management mailing list on behalf of Grieshaber, Steve
Sent: Fri 25/07/2008 09:40
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: How successful has RM been? (was RE: Comparative definitions of Classification and Taxonomy)

New to the list, so hi everyone :-)

I think that you are both right, yes the advent of electronic storage mechanisms coupled with the apathy of users to keep to the traditional values of RM and the inability of records managers to face up to the electronic challenge has brought us to where we are now. Things are slowly getting better as Chris infers and RM is beginning to make a reappearance within the corporate space.

I think that the 'invisibility' of electronic information that is the main culprit. People are able to create vast amounts of electronic information and records, store them in vast repositories and largely ignore them. With physical files, folders and records, it's difficult to ignore the mounting volumes being tended. There is tangible evidence of records being managed in and out of the repository. It is hard to ignore warehouses and rooms full of paper files.

The light is beginning to dawn in many organisations that electronic storage isn't limitless and it costs, lots! Records and Information Managers need to learn to market themselves, peddle their wares, and help solve the electronic information monster. We need to woo the business and make the paradigm shift from thinking about paper to also thinking electronic.

Steve Grieshaber MBA(Open)
Head of Information Management
Wiltshire County Council

-----Original Message-----
From: The UK Records Management mailing list on behalf of Tinsley, Chris
Sent: Fri 7/25/2008 09:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: How successful has RM been? (was RE: Comparative definitions of Classification and Taxonomy)

Steve

I think you have slightly missed the point which, at least from my point
of view, is that the baby was thrown out with the bath water when PC's
and other like devices became the vogue but the traditional values have,
in later years, made a comeback as users have begun to see the scale of
the problem and Records Managers have began to market themselves better.

Chris Tinsley MSc
Wiltshire County Council

Information is the key


________________________________

From: The UK Records Management mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Steve Bailey
- JISC infoNet
Sent: 25 July 2008 08:42
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: How successful has RM been? (was RE: Comparative definitions of
Classification and Taxonomy)



Hi Trish,



Peter Emerson made a similar point to you in an earlier message in the
thread (i.e. suggesting that it is not RM and its 'rules' that are the
problem, but the fact that they have been widely ignored for all these
years).



Though there may well be some truth in this assertion I'm not sure what
comfort or relief it actually gives us?  After all, there is little
point in being right if the rest of the world ignores you.  The guys who
invented the Betamax knew damn well they had the best machine, but
somewhere along the line they had to admit to themselves that they had
failed to convince the consumer of this and watched the vastly inferior
VHS romp to victory...



Ok, not a brilliant analogy but you get the point



 Being right in theory is only a (very small) part of the equation - its
influencing the way that technology is designed, users think and
organisations function that counts and what both you and Peter both seem
to be admitting is that we have largely failed on this score.  But where
as some may see this as a defence ("its not our fault, if only people
would listen to us") I see it as a worrying flaw that we should address
("why don't people listen to us? " How can we change what we do and how
we do it to make it more effective etc").



Regards



Steve




**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may be subject to Copyright or Intellectual Property rights. It is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify the sender and delete the email from your inbox. Any disclosure, reproduction, dissemination, modification and distribution of the contents of the email is strictly prohibited. Email content may be monitored by Wiltshire County Council to ensure compliance with its policies and procedures. No contract is intended by this email, and any personal opinions expressed in this message are those of the sender and should not be taken as representing views of Wiltshire County Council.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. However the sender will not be liable for any alteration of the contents and any attachments of this email as a result of a virus.
**********************************************************************
Please do not print out this e-mail unless absolutely necessary. Save energy and paper!



______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
______________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________
This email, and any attachment, is intended for the attention of the addressee only. Its unauthorised use, disclosure, storage or copying is not permitted. If you are not the intended recipient, please destroy all copies and inform the sender by return email and send a copy to [log in to unmask] Thank you for your co-operation.

Please note the author of this email is not authorised to conclude any contract on behalf of the Solicitors Regulation Authority by email.