 |
 |
A couple of exerts from my dissertation (apologies if this doesn't format well). Contact me off list if you'd like a copy. The TNA catalogue revealed that from circa 1880 government departments were producing schedules stating when their records would be destroyed or transferred to the Public Record Office (PRO). The schedules followed a standard template, laid out in a table. The first column listed the Office within a Department, the second column gave the types of records generated, and the third column gave the age at which a document could be destroyed. Records believed to have historical value were not initially included in these schedules because preserving a record did not require Parliamentary approval. Later examples of schedules do include the types of records to be preserved, however this was more for information and not because they required Parliamentary approval. Hilary Jenkinson, a prominent commentator onarchives and records management theory,questioned whether the schedules required by the 1877 Public Record Office Act were effective in managing records (1937, p.152). He concluded that records should be managed before they reached the end of their lifecycle, and not at the end, writing: ‘we propose to try to prevent the accumulations occurring at all; to deal with the matter before the documents come to the Archive state and custody’ (ibid). Jenkinson argued that a ‘register’ should be used to determine which records could be destroyed immediately, which required appraisal, and which could be destroyed.Although not so named, it can be argued that the ‘register’ is the equivalent of a modern-day retention schedule. Although the Schedules created out of the 1877 Act are also not called ‘retention schedules’ and do not manage retention as Jenkinson suggested, it is reasonable to suggest that these Schedules should be treated as retention schedules. As Proctor argued, the Schedules ‘...are identical in form to the retention schedule familiar to today’s records managers’ (2008, p.144). Although the main intention of the schedules was to list records for destruction, reference to records that were kept were more often than not included, as in the example in figure 5. It is for these reasons that Schedules ‘containing a list of particulars’ and submitted to Parliament, should be treated as early examples of retention schedules. ----- A few sources do go into further detail than just how to produce a retention schedule. They demonstrate how to categorise records for retention purposes, either grouping them according to their business purpose or by subject. The traditional method of retention was according to their primary, secondary, evidential and research ‘value’. Records were therefore listed according to subjects or individual cases which, Scott argues, made the appraisal process laborious (Scott, 1997, p.104). For this reason the functional appraisal process was introduced, which in turn led to functional retention schedules. However, in 1984,Dickinson found that many companies continued to write retention schedules in a ‘neat alphabetical listing’ (Dickinson, 1984, p.29), urging that functional retention schedules were a better method. Records in functional retention schedules can be quickly identified for retention purposes because ‘the functional approach is based on the premise that records are the inputs to and outputs of business functions and activities’ (McLeod & Hare, 2006, p.86). Functional retention schedules are now more common, with the records management standard ISO 15489-1 (2001) recommending it as the best method. For the records manager unaware of how to group their records according to function,Batchelor (2006) lists good examples of record functions. Torres is another advocate offunctional retention schedules, arguing that thetraditional format encouraged duplication where more than one department may be part of the same function, but keep their own copies of records (2006, p.63). Sent from my iPhone > On 8 May 2017, at 10:13, Caroline Williams <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Schellenberg Modern Archives p.97- 104 discusses historic development of disposition plans, disposal schedules – and notes as Katherine says that 1877 Public Records Act empowered ‘disposal or destruction of documents’ to be preceded by ‘a Schedule to be prepared’ of documents or classes of documents… > > Caroline > > > > Caroline Williams, BA, RMARA > Independent Archival Consultant > Visiting Professor, Liverpool John Moores University > Tel: 01244 316150 > Twitter: @CarolineWilli07 > > > From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Anna-K. Mayer > Sent: Monday, May 8, 2017 10:01 AM > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Origin of the humble records retention schedule > > I'd be interested in Katherine's answer to this too - what were they saying at the time in terms of retention and disposition? > > > On 8 May 2017 at 09:40, Meic Pierce Owen <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Thanks Katharine. What were they saying at that time in terms of retention and disposition? > > From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Katharine Stevenson > Sent: 08 May 2017 09:39 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Re: Origin of the humble records retention schedule > > Hi > > I wrote my MSc Records Management dissertation on this and identified the 1877 Public Records Act as the first time retention schedule requirements arose (although not called retention schedules). I also identified some earlier examples. Happy to share a copy with Henry and anyone else (although may be more detail than you were after!). Otherwise I'd suggest looking at a copy of the Act directly. > > Kind regards > Katharine > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 8 May 2017, at 08:06, Meic Pierce Owen <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Henry > > This is a really good question- and one that is relevant to a good number of us in the context of the SCAI > > I have put some feelers out around the more, how can I put it, senior end of the profession. > > In a particularly Scottish public sector context, I wonder if Iain (Flett), who I know takes this list, could enlighten us a little on the appearance and development of schedules. > > Regards > > Meic > > From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Henry Sullivan > Sent: 05 May 2017 15:10 > To: [log in to unmask] > Subject: Origin of the humble records retention schedule > > Afternoon all – a Friday afternoon question for you; can anyone give me an origin for the humble Records Retention Schedule / Policy as a concept? > > I have a hunch it is a creature of the 1970’s (possibly the 1960’s) but I could be wrong. I have both Googled and checked our limited library of professional literature here in our office to no avail. > > The question has a serious purpose in that I am having to justify the retention of records from 1930 through to 2014 as part of the Scottish Child Abuse Inquiry and it would be nice to point out that standardised retention based on function and activity is a relatively recent development. > > Yours in sincere hope of a good response, > > Henry > > Henry Sullivan | Information Asset Manager | Information Governance Unit | Strategy & Insight Division| Chief Executive | The City of Edinburgh Council | Business Centre 2.1 | Waverley Court | 4 East Market Street | Edinburgh | EH8 8BG | 0131 469 6170 [log in to unmask] | Web:www.edinburgh.gov.uk | Blog:http://Lothianlives.org.uk > > > ********************************************************************** > > This email and files transmitted with it are confidential and are intended for the sole use of the individual or organisation to whom they are addressed. > If you have received this eMail in error please notify the sender immediately and delete it without using, copying, storing, forwarding or disclosing its contents to any other person. > The Council has endeavoured to scan this eMail message and attachments for computer viruses and will not be liable for any losses incurred by the recipient. > ********************************************************************** > > 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] > > > ********************************************************************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and should not be disclosed to any other party. > > If you have received this email in error please notify your system manager and the sender of this message. > > This email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses but no guarantee is given that this e-mail message and any attachments are free from viruses. > > Fife Council reserves the right to monitor the content of all incoming and outgoing email. > > Fife Council > > ************************************************ > > 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] > 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] > > > ********************************************************************** > This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed and should not be disclosed to any other party. > > If you have received this email in error please notify your system manager and the sender of this message. > > This email message has been swept for the presence of computer viruses but no guarantee is given that this e-mail message and any attachments are free from viruses. > > Fife Council reserves the right to monitor the content of all incoming and outgoing email. > > Fife Council > > ************************************************ > > 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] > > 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] > 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] 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]