Print

Print


Sarah

 

I agree - you just beat me to it.  I've said all I plan to say on this topic
in this listserv.

My apologies to anybody upset by the length of the discussion - "I would
have written a shorter letter, but I did not have the time" (Blaise Pascal).

 

Marc Fresko

 

From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Graham Sarah (NHS
ENGLAND)
Sent: 12 November 2015 08:43
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: RM Control Grid - a short review

 

Gentlemen, do you not think it's time to take this discussion off the
listserv?  

 

This back and forth sparring isn't doing either of you any favours.

 

Regards

 

Sarah

 

 

 

From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frank Guerino
Sent: 11 November 2015 17:10
To: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
Subject: Re: RM Control Grid - a short review

 

Marc,

 

In just over two days, the RM Control Grid
<http://www.if4it.com/records-management-rm-control-grid/>  has been
downloaded by over 100 people around the world and we've received almost 400
requests for more information and/or positive feedback.  Whether you believe
it or not, there are others who contribute to it, like it and who get value
from it and our other materials.  This includes some of the largest
companies and government agencies in the world (some of them right in the
U.K, where you operate).  We also vet the material against other
documentation which, interestingly, contradicts your opinions.

 

I'm not up for a flame war with you.  If you have other options available
for the community, great, please offer them up for use.  Or, if you have
constructive feedback that helps improve what we're doing, please provide it
and we'll gladly do what we can to incorporate it.  If, on the other hand,
you're only tactic is to attack me and the IF4IT for what we're doing and
making openly available, so be it.  I recognize that we can't please
everyone and we'll simply continue to work with those who do get it, who are
constructive, and who want our help.

 

My Best,

 

Frank

-- 
Frank Guerino, Chairman
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)

 

 

 

 

From: Marc Fresko <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Organization: Inforesight Limited
Reply-To: Marc Fresko <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Date: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 at 11:38 AM
To: <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Subject: Re: RM Control Grid - a short review

 

Thank you to all the IRMS Fellows and others who have written to me off-list
supporting my observations on the IF4IT and its "grid".

 

Thank you also to Frank for writing to  "personally" thank me, despite the
negative tenor of my review.  Very noble of you.

 

I am less grateful, Frank, that you think this listserv is a good platform
from which to try to attack Inforesight's website.  It isn't.  The review
was mine, and my company's website is irrelevant to the discussion (unless
it has potential for harm or misdirection, as does IF4IT's site).  But since
you raise it, you are right that the site is not even recognised by Alexa.
Actually, that's fine: perhaps unlike some, we don't look to our website to
generate large volumes of irrelevant hits; we rely instead on it being found
by anyone who might need us.  So, while Alexa does not care about our site -
and Alexa also fails to notice sites of almost ALL the small UK and Ireland
consultancies I checked - Inforesight has a pleasingly high Google PageRank
(meaning it is easily findable).  In fact the Inforesight PageRank is higher
than IF4IT's PageRank.

 

Frank, maybe you really have, as you claim, received 200 "positive feedback
submissions and requests for more information".  The world is a big place,
and I would be amazed if there are not at least that number of
poorly-informed folk, desperate for RM help, who think that your "grid" has
high face validity, and that it represents a quick-and-easy shortcut to
overcoming the complex challenges of records management.  There are always
suckers "out there" who fall for apparently quick fixes.  It is precisely
because there are such people that I am concerned enough to take my time to
look at your output, and to bother to respond.  These people deserve better
than a poorly produced, misleading and (at least arguably) incorrect and
misleading document.  You ask for "some specific and productive improvement
ideas and examples".  Here are a few.  And believe me, this is only a tiny
fraction of the problems and issues.

 

1. GLOSSARY - MISSING TERMS

You claim to provide a glossary of RM terms.  But it omits lots of terms,
including some that are essential to RM.  So a few missing terms are (see if
you can spot  the essential ones):

- Archive

- Flawed

- Classification

- Pointless

- Retention

- Useless

- Series

- Inconsistent

Despite being absent from the glossary, several important terms are used
elsewhere in your RM resources.

SPECIFIC ADVICE: define the terms you use.  Make your glossaries (all of
them) complete.

 

2. POOR, LOOSE, DEFINITIONS

One example.  The grid defines "Policy Link" as "An HTML link to the
detailed policies, processes and procedures for said Record Type [including]
policies for communications, testing, archiving, access, recovery,
destruction and purging, at a minimum".   Leave aside the point that it
rarely makes sense to have policies of this kind at the record type level,
(1) the assertion that the link must be an HTML is nonsense; (2) a link to
"Policy Link" should not point to  "policies, PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES"; (3)
there is no need for the word "detailed" here.  

Second example: "Taxonomy of Record Types" is defined at
http://www.if4it.com/taxonomy.html  as "A linear list of the different
Record types that have been deemed to be important to IT Organizations, IT
Professionals, and the Business stakeholders they provide services for. This
taxonomy is a component of the IT Discipline called Records Management and
is often used to classify the many different types of records that are
generated and tracked as part of its processes."  Tricky to know where to
stop with this one:   (1) it is unnecessary, because if taxonomy is defined
as it should be, and "Record types" is also defined you do not need this
definition, and indeed any definition other than "See Record Type and
Taxonomy" will mislead; (2) Taxonomies to not need to be linear; (3) the
definition is completely different to the definition in your grid (glossary
sheet)(!); (4)  the term is missing from your own RM Glossary; (5) it
depends on "record type", your definition of which is recursive (thus
meaningless); (6) few RM practitioners would agree that RM is an "IT
discipline"; and so on, I lack the courage to go on.

These are only two examples of many in the grid, and one example of
LITERALLY HUNDREDS OF LOOSE AND POOR DEFINITIONS IN THE IF4IT SITE.

SPECIFIC ADVICE: Tidy up your glossaries to make them consistent and
correct.

 

3. AUTHORITY, ATTRIBUTION

I could not find in IF4IT.com or the grid any authorities for the assertions
and definitions; no attributions, no acknowledgements and no thanks.  No
mention of any standards, authoritative guidance, or trade bodies.  Some
readers might be tempted to think that the content is entirely
machine-generated without reference to external expertise.

SPECIFIC ADVICE: cite and acknowledge your authorities.

 

4. MECHANICAL, UNCURATED

The content of the IF4IT glossary, frameworks, models etc. gives the
appearance of being machine-generated, without expert human curation.
Presumably as a result, they are littered  with hundreds of errors and
ambiguities.  If the "Foundation" had the kind of expertise I claims, this
would not happen.

SPECIFIC ADVICE: use the expertise available to your institute to remove the
most egregious anomalies from your publications; then work your way on to
the rest.

 

5.  FOUNDATION

Some readers might express their surprise at a "Foundation" which does not
list its founders, members, principals, clients, staff, governance model or
street address.  They might suspect that there is little substance in the
organisation, and that the appellation "Foundation" is grander than is
warranted.

SPECIFIC ADVICE: be open about what the IF4IT really is.

 

 

Marc Fresko

 

From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frank Guerino
Sent: 09 November 2015 17:25
To: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
Subject: Re: RM Control Grid - a short review

 

Hi Marc,

 

I wanted to personally thank you for taking the time to provide your
opinions.  Although, I personally believe your critique would have been more
helpful had you to provided some specific and productive improvement ideas
and examples.

 

It's interesting that since requesting the feedback, this morning, we
received more than 200 positive feedback submissions and requests for more
information.  This also includes requests for formats of taxonomies and the
glossary for load into other systems (both which have also generated
positive feedback).

 

While you personally believe that the grid doesn't help people, please note
that it originated from data provided by numerous very big brand enterprises
that already use such tools to manage their RM efforts.  It would appear
that their RM stakeholders, at a minimum, disagree with your positions.

 

So, given your single negative critique there is a ratio of greater than
200:1 for people who disagree with you.  Please do not feel offended if we
continue to work with them.

 

By the way, since you felt the need to personally attack our web site,
please note that we're constantly working to improve it.  I did check your
web site and noticed that, after approximately six years of existence, it
has yet to register enough traffic to even be considered noteworthy by
measurement sites like Alexa.  You may want to work on that before attacking
other sites.

 

Again, thank you for your contributions.

 

My Best,

 

Frank

-- 
Frank Guerino, Chairman
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)

 

 

 

 

From: Marc Fresko <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Organization: Inforesight Limited
Reply-To: Marc Fresko <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Date: Monday, November 9, 2015 at 11:51 AM
To: <[log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> >
Subject: Re: RM Control Grid - a short review

 

Executive Summary

 

I looked at this grid.  Oh dear.  Not a good use of electrons.

 

In a bit more detail

 

We've seen self-promotional postings here from this "institute" posting
before.  Every two years at about this time of year in fact.  I recall
commenting in 2013 that most of the institute's site content could be seen
as spurious (I am choosing my words, um, delicately).  This is more of the
same, or at least some might say so (is that delicate enough?)

 

The "grid" itself is a small Excel spreadsheet.  It invites you to list all
your record types, one Excel row per type. The value it purports to add is
by proposing 50 metadata attributes for each record type, and the idea is
that you populate the metadata for each of your record types (yes, 50 for
each!)  Good luck with that.  Fortunately (for the amount of work required)
or unfortunately (for the credibility of the grid) many of the attributes
are not normally related to record types.  If you understand your RM, this
might prompt some idea or thought you did not previously have, but the
benefit would be slight for most.  If you don't understand your RM, it will
not be helpful and in some cases will be positively unhelpful.  Or so some
indelicate folk might say.

 

The grid is backed up by a glossary which is awful (no need for delicacy
here).  The definitions are confused, confusing, internally inconsistent,
and (at least arguably) wrong in material respects.  They contain errors of
every kind I can think of: spelling, grammar, clarity, correctness,
completeness.  if you doubt me, try to follow through the definitions of
"Record" and "Record Item" then their usages in other definitions. Better
yet, don't - it is not a fruitful use of time.

 

Some people might say (if they lack a certain delicacy) that the worst thing
about this grid is the website on which it is hosted.  Much of it contains
of hundreds and hundreds of definitions, mostly useless, unnecessary and
seemingly machine-generated.  Avoid with glee.

 

Sorry.

 

Marc Fresko

 

 

 

From: The Information and Records Management Society mailing list
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Frank Guerino
Sent: 09 November 2015 11:59
To: [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]> 
Subject: RM Control Grid

 

Hi All,

 

(Apologies for cross-posting.)

 

For those interested, we've been putting together a Records Management
Command, Control and Communications Grid (a.k.a. a RM Control Grid).  The
grid currently consists of over 50 control attributes, with a metadata
dictionary and term glossary.  The goal is to help Records Managers across
different enterprises reuse and track key common RM data.

 

If anyone is interested in using it or providing feedback to help improve
it, the document can be found at the download location:
http://www.if4it.com/download-records-management-control-grid/.  Download
does require free registration with the site but doing it this way allows us
to better control versioning and distribution.

 

If interested in more detail, there is also a correlating blog post with
some more descriptive information about the grid located at:
http://www.if4it.com/records-management-rm-control-grid/

 

We hope you find it useful and we look forward to any feedback you might be
able to offer.

 

My Best,

 

Frank

-- 
Frank Guerino, Chairman
The International Foundation for Information Technology (IF4IT)
http://www.if4it.com
1.908.294.5191 (M)

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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  


****************************************************************************
****************************************

This message may contain confidential information. If you are not the
intended recipient please inform the
sender that you have received the message in error before deleting it.
Please do not disclose, copy or distribute information in this e-mail or
take any action in reliance on its contents:
to do so is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful.

Thank you for your co-operation.

NHSmail is the secure email and directory service available for all NHS
staff in England and Scotland
NHSmail is approved for exchanging patient data and other sensitive
information with NHSmail and GSi recipients
NHSmail provides an email address for your career in the NHS and can be
accessed anywhere

****************************************************************************
****************************************

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]
<mailto:[log in to unmask]>  with the words UNSUBSCRIBE
RECORDS-MANAGEMENT-UK For any technical queries re JISC please email
[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>  For any content
based queries, please email [log in to unmask]
<mailto:[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]