On that basis, the Local Government Classification Scheme should be kept hidden to the profession. And Wikipedia closed to keep the encyclopaedia compiler's profession in business; surely they'd do a better job?

Business has moved on from 40 years ago Peter. Reagan; jump in, use those tools. Information professionals reuse and customize classification schemes all the time; indeed it is a central tenet of the profession. Learn as you go. Do a course run by the IRMS or get in touch with a qualified professional if you find yourself out of your depth. You may find their assistance so valuable you're willing to pay for it; or that you gain so much experience others will be willing to pay you.

As a profession we need and should be sharing our philosophies, good practice, tools and breadth of understanding to society and the wider information management profession (perhaps by integrating with it). Only then will our capability be more widely understood. It is good to share.

Adam Pope
BA (Hons) MLIS MCLIP
@adampope | 07977238873 | informationhandyman.com | London


On 13 May 2011 10:19, Peter Emmerson <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
May I raise a point of principle here.  As a qualified recordkeeping
professional with more than 40 years experience and someone who used to make
a living, among other things, designing functional classification and
retention schemes, I'm disturbed by this approach.  It's certainly not, in
my opinion, what the list is for.  Developing such schemes is, or should be,
among the core components of a programme for managing records.  They are
very much of the business and though publicly available models exist, they
are not intended to be 'plug and play' and need to be tailored to the
individual organisation.  They are also, almost by definition, best
developed as corporate schemes which are then implemented at departmental
level rather than piecemeal, department by department.

Organisations which have gone through this process have invested money and
time in it, either by employing real in-house expertise or by buying in that
expertise from skilled, specialist consultants.  It's unreasonable, and
potentially dangerous, to expect to piggy back on that investment by asking
colleagues on the list to share their schemes in this way.  One of the
on-list respondents got it right when he said 'Pay me and I'll do it for
you'.

As I'm now retired and commercially disinterested, perhaps I can make a
point on behalf of my professional colleagues and of my former consultancy
competitors.  If you don't have the expertise to develop the tools then
either recruit someone who can or engage any one of a number of excellent
consultants to do it for you. In the end you'll get a better result in half
the time. List members should also recognise that there is a difference
between helping a colleague to solve an immediate problem and doing their
job for them.  It's not necessarily 'good to share'.

To view the list archives go to: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?A0=RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK
To unsubscribe from this list, send an email to [log in to unmask] with the words UNSUBSCRIBE RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK

For any technical queries re JISC please email [log in to unmask]
For any content based queries, please email [log in to unmask]

For any technical queries re JISC please email [log in to unmask] For any content based queries, please email [log in to unmask]