ATR: To the Defense of Archives (and the English Language)

I'm throwing down the gauntlet. I'm tired of people mis-using the term "archival" and now I see that the term "archivist" is going to start to be abused. I've engaged in a periodic running battle with Benjamin Wright. He's a lawyer; I'm not. I probably shouldn't single him out here, but unfortunately, he pops up on my Google Reader blogs and his usage gets in my face. Small apology to Mr. Wright for picking on him, because there are undoubtedly many sinners in this space.

"Archival".
Someone tell me when this term became a noun. Checking Dictionary.com, "archival" is an adjective. However, I keep seeing the term used as a noun, generally in combination with "email", as in "email archival". What the heck is that? Arguably, you could say "archival email" and that would (sort of) have meaning, but "email archival" has no meaning in the English language. You could also say "email archive", but I'd rather that you didn't.

In this post, Mr. Wright says,

Many lawyers and archivists recommend, for example, that email systems be configured to purge email, by default, after only . . . 15 days or 30 days.

ARCHIVISTS say this? Whoa! At least in North America, an archivist is generally assigned to be the custodian of historical records. In other parts of the world, an archivist is the de facto records manager for an organization. But I would suggest that at least this records manager (and fallen away archivist) would never suggest that all email be deleted in short order. Email is a means of transport and storage for information. Paper is also a means of transport and storage for information. The content value of the information drives the retention period, not the means of transport and storage. If you are going to suggest that "email" has a particular retention period, then you also have to set a retention period for "paper".

Now records managers have been known to be accused of being Conan the Shredder from time to time by our colleagues who toil in historical archives. If anything, when conflicts arise regarding destruction of records in the information professions, it's archivists thinking records manager are too quick to destroy records and records managers thinking archivists are too slow.

So my thinking is that Mr. Wright is considering IT storage management professionals to be "archivists" (these are the same folks who have to manage all those email "archivals", I guess, so they must be "archivists"). Let's put a stop to this nonsense right now. We have enough difficulty explaining the difference between "backups" and "archives" to the IT folks. And when you insert a "real" archivist into the mix (because your organization has an historical archive), people get really confused.

I would suggest the following: the storage location for information is a "repository", regardless of the physical form of the information. So when you retain email, it is retained in an email repository. When you retain hard copy, you store it in a hard copy repository. The discipline of managing the repository is "storage management". The discipline of setting the retention period for an organization's records is "records management" or "retention management" or even some flavor of "governance".

If we can agree on those terms, let's look at the issue raised by Mr. Wright. Mr. Wright is rapidly leaning into the camp that suggests that email should be retained in an "immutable archive" (there's that term again, although not used by Mr. Wright) -- which means that you don't delete any email message once it is created or received. His logic in the article seems to indicate that only bad guys delete email because they must have something to hide.

For good business people, lengthy, complete email and text message records -- including all the metadata -- are a friend.

The only people who have incentive to destroy their electronic message records quickly are mobsters, the Mafia. They of course are motivated to toss all the smoking guns and dead bodies into the river.

I can understand where this logic comes from, but I would suggest that if you are going to retain all electronic messages, you have to retain all paper messages as well. And that means that you have to retain EVERYTHING that shows up in paper form -- and, to ensure that you are retaining metadata for the paper, you have to keep the envelopes too. So when I get an advertisement in the mail, I'm going to have to keep it, regardless of the fact that in the electronic world, that same content might have been deleted automatically by a spam filter. Those reusable Interoffice envelopes? Use them once and keep them to show when the document was sent. That FedEx box? Better keep it to show the routing stickers and codes used by FedEx to deliver the documents.

Clearly that's nonsense. But it is effectively what is being suggested in the electronic world. And I don't buy the statement, "Well, you can easily tell what is junk and what is a record when it is a paper document." So we're suggesting that human beings are capable of discerning non-record from record in the paper world, but they can't do this in the electronic world? But hard copy records take up too much space and they are costly to retain! Try that one with electronic records. There is a double standard here that simply makes no sense to me.

I would suggest that proper management of information starts with much better training than most organizations are prepared to deliver today. And, that training has to be followed with auditing of business practices. If you can train people well, create a simple system to ensure that record-worthy information is retained in appropriate repositories, and validate that the rules are being followed, then you will have a defensible system of record. That is neither easy, nor is it inexpensive. But it is necessary before we start to see case law and precedent built up that demands two systems of records in an organization -- paper records and electronic records.

I am rapidly becoming an advocate of developing systems that separate information into three buckets: first, non-records; second, transitory records; third, declared records.

Non-records:
Non-records do not have to be retained and if not immediately disposed of, should be fully discarded within a relatively brief period of time (say 60 days). So you build into your repository a means to discard the garbage within 60 days of receipt or creation.

Transitory Records:
Transitory records are maintained for a period of time to determine if they should become a declared record or discarded as a non-record. This transition period should be fairly short, perhaps no more than two years. Government retention schedules have most often defined transitory records and often set even shorter retention periods.

Declared Records:
Declared records are assigned a retention period tied to a record series or category on a retention schedule. The repository for declared records will generally have greater controls over deletion and changes to the records as well as provide mechanisms to establish legal holds (arguably, any repository for information -- including those for non-records and transitory records -- should have a mechanism to ensure that information subject to a legal hold is retained until released from hold).


To circle back to where I started, I would suggest that all of us who support the management and retention of information come to agreement on more precise use of terms that describe what is being retained and where it is retained, particularly when those terms have the potential to be seen as confusing or conflicting between information professionals.

OTR: Public Speaking

I'm back from the ARMA Conference for a week, but it feels like a month. Today was the first day that I had a few minutes to catch my breath at work and I spent some time cleaning up email and getting back to some folks that I met at Conference. A few of those folks were kind enough to compliment me on my presentations and ask me if I'd like to speak at one of their Chapter meetings or seminars.

I'm always flattered to be asked. I don't speak as much as I once did, when I was building a career and trying to get rolling in consulting (the firm saw speaking as marketing). Today, the Day Job is time-consuming, but I do allow myself time to get out and do a presentation on occasion. I often joke to my colleagues in the Chicago Chapter that the only time that I'm able to see them is when they invite me to speak.

If you're interested in having me speak to your Chapter or non-profit organization, all I ask is that you cover my travel expenses, feed me, and give me a place to stay. If it is a for-profit event, an honorarium would be appropriate. I do have a list of presentations and I will customize what I've done, but a completely new topic is often a challenge (but feel free to ask). Since I usually do a presentation at the ARMA Conference, I usually have at least one piece of new material every year. I always tell folks that if you've gone to the expense of getting me to your event, feel free to make use of me all day. I always feel bad when I get up and speak for 45 or 75 minutes and head right back to the airport. I try to arrive the night before and my preferred airline is United (yet another geek thing for me). If it is close to Chicago and flying would involve something with no headroom and propellers, I'll drive or see if Amtrak goes there.

I'm in the ARMA directory or my email address is available if you click the link to my Blogger Profile.

ATR: My FAI Thank You Speech

As many of you know, at the ARMA International Conference in Orlando, I was privileged to be named to ARMA International's Company of Fellows. As Fellow #43, some wags refer to me as "W" or "Dubya"... short pause while you think about that...

When I received the official Lucite plaque, I was offered five minutes for some remarks. I now publish them here, for those of you who may have missed the Awards Reception.

++++++++++++++++++++++

My Dear Friends and Colleagues:

As I stand here today, the first thought that comes to me is, in the immortal words of Wayne and Garth…. “I’m not worthy!” But here I stand, nonetheless. I’ve been given about five minutes for some comments, so I’ve prepared my remarks tonight, mainly, as many of you know, because I am often incapable of speaking in increments of less than an hour and fifteen minutes.

I am humbled and honored to be here tonight. Almost 20 years ago, I sat in a hotel ballroom in San Francisco and watched the first Fellows be introduced to the Association. At the time, I never imagined that I would someday be able to count my name among those luminaries. I was, after all, but a little records manager at the time.

There are many people that I need to thank tonight. I’ll start with my colleagues who nominated me. I am humbled to be so honored by them. Larry Bates, Beth Chiaiese, and Tim Hughes, I am forever in your debt for your nomination. Thank you. Next must come my family – my wife and daughters – who have often wondered what it is that I do when I traipse off to some exotic locale like Kansas City, Boise, Omaha, Milwaukee, Detroit, Appleton, or Bloomington. You see, the road to this honor was paved with many visits to many places where there was no doubt that I had to be speaking or learning. But airport t-shirts and key chains are small substitutes for dinners missed, so to them, I also say thank you for allowing me to grow in my craft and share what I know with others.

I must take a minute to thank Jac Treanor, my dear friend, colleague, and mentor. Without Jac allowing me time, early in my career, to give back to my profession, and the opportunity to speak in public, I would not be here today. Jac is also the boss who gave me my first computer and the opportunity to learn how to use it. Yep, he’s the one to blame.

There are many others along the way – such as the officers of the Chicago Chapter who welcomed me in to their midst, gave me responsibility, and bought me many a soda from the bar; or Mike Pemberton, who asked me to participate on the Task Force that developed the Code of Professional Responsibility; or John Phillips, who asked me to help launch ARMA’s first website; and ARMA’s Education staff, who put up with my “just in time” style of preparing presentations for Conference.

I also want to thank the Chapter meeting and seminar leaders and the Program Committee members through the years who have thought well enough of me to invite me to share my thoughts with our members. And of course, I want to thank all of you who have put up with my unanswerable questions, long-winded stories, and bad jokes all of these years. I trust that you actually learned something from me.

I’d also like to thank the many International Board members and the staff of the Association who put up with my griping from time to time, then welcomed me as a Board member so I could see how the sausage was made.

There are many others who also deserve thanks and my gratitude for their wisdom, their friendship, and their encouragement. Some of you know who you are and I thank you, even if I don’t name you here tonight.

I think this is the part where I am supposed to impart some wisdom or some special insight into the future of our profession. What I say tonight is what I often say in my presentations… Never stop learning. Never stop growing. Use this Association to network and to step beyond your comfort zone. I believe that our profession is at the cusp of significant changes that will redefine what it is that we do as records managers and how we perform our work. We have to embrace those changes and welcome the opportunities that come with change.

My present boss is fond of saying… “There are no challenges, only opportunities.” In these times, and in this profession, those are words to live by.

Party on… and thank you.

ATR: Twitter

A couple of weeks ago, at a half day seminar that I presented to the ARMA Nebraska Chapter, I said something humorous about "twits Tweeting" (I liked the alliteration) . With all due respect to my esteemed professional colleagues who Tweet with regularity, I hope you understand that I wasn't talking about you.

I opened a Twitter account the other day and began doing some "Following" this evening. There's a work-related reason for this, but we'll add that story to the book of stories that I can't ever tell in public. It will be a long book at the rate things are going.

Anyway.

I decided to see what this "Following" thing was all about. So I "Followed" some of my fellow bloggers, some work-related Twitter accounts, and some odds and ends. Next thing I know, people are thanking me for Following them, and inviting others to Follow ME!!!! EEEEEK! Then people I'm not Following are signing up with me and I think they are all expecting a Tweet or something. People, people, people... I can't speak in less than 75 minute increments or create a PowerPoint with less than 25 slides and there is no way in heck that I can write anything resembling a full thought in 140 characters or less. I had to create this blog because I was filling up the Listserve when I rambled on...

So sorry Followers, there will be no profundity in less than 140 characters from me. You'll have to come here for the unabridged version. And you really don't care about my general health, what I had for lunch, or what I'm shopping for, right?

Why is this post, "Above the RIM"? Well, even if you are afraid of becoming known as a twit who Tweets, you may need to join Twitter to see who is Tweeting and what presence your organization has on Twitter. You might be surprised. And when you find your organization's presence, have you found records of the organization, pointers to press releases retained elsewhere, or just the musings of twits who Tweet?

I'll be over here, trying not to bow to peer pressure or those accumulating Followers...