ve public
go. Curation,
saul
urs on Centre
1 che DELOS
ps selosacutk)
urze (DPF)
Principal
te sshance the
gaged in
‘cutting
frase sector
Head of ICT
ising in
(Fo ow at the
ys = College,
e seacable at
Ee
i
cs nal Health
emg research
tos He served:
< = Records
ces +) the Civil
pF os Sectum
)~ snagement
jr 2002 he
$= of Great
Records and the transition to
the digital
Allstair Tough+
Introduction
Much of the existing literature of record keeping is oriented to an ideal
world where record-keeping professionals enjay the support of top
management, have a clear and comprehensive mandate, possess ample
resources and have a securely founded change management strategy. For
‘many, the challenge is to move the real warld towards this desirable stare
of affairs. Ie would be a mistake, however, to imagine that we need to
start with a blank shect, There ate useful tools and methodologies currently
available, and there is much in recent theoretical debate that can be of
value to the practitioner,
It is often said that technology has made x massive difference ro
contemporary record keeping. One has only to think of composite
documents that incorporate word-processed text, graphics and tables
produced using several differem software packages to see the truth in
this statement. However, it is worth reminding ourselves that important
organisational changes began betore the widespread use of personal
computers. These organisational changes have included decentralisation
and delayering. They have often been accompanied by a mindset that
secs back office functions as ‘waste’. Here it is important o remind
vurselves that there are two major traditions of record keeping in the
English-speaking world.* ‘the Commonwealth tradition, exported fram
Britain to Australia, India, New Zealand, South Africa and many
developing nations in Africa, Asia, the Pacific and the West Indies, is
founded on the principle of pre-action aggregation and routing ofRecord Keeping in a Hybrid Cvironment
records. This has been widely implemented via registry systems. The
‘American tradition, in contast, is based on inlividual action followed
by post-hoc filing. This distinction is particularly significant ecause
most software packages intended for office use are based on an American
approach that cuts out “back office’ functions.
‘One other preliminary observation needs to be introduced here,
regarding the distinction between ‘routine? and ‘ercative’ work. Shepherd
and Yen suggest that the latter can pose greacr challenges for
record-keeping systems. There can be little doubt that routine processes
generally lend themselves to the kind of systenuatic approaches favoured
by record-keeping. professionals. However, any suggestion that creative
work will always and necessarily generate difficulties needs 0 be
examined critically. ‘The degree of external regulation and internal
discipline can be crucial factors. These points will be developed further
helow.
Models of record keeping
Models, and graphic representations, are appropriate to the age in which
we live — an eta that is noticeably less text bound than most of the
preceding century, Levy, alongside many others, argues that a wide
Tange of non-text items (maps, diagrams, pictates, photographs, and all
manner of other conventional and well-articulated, nonverbal
representations”) can be regarded as ducuments in the contemporary
‘world, Models can elucidate thinking, not least where abstract concepts
are concerned. Models imay also help us to work across disciplinary
boundaries, Marilyn Steathern® reminds us that all models are products
of abstraction and possess ritual and symbolic significance, There is a
strong case for saying that we should not shy away from the ritual and
syubolic aspects of modelling, as they may work few usm a paper to the
Society of Archivists’ 2004 conference, James Currall spoke about the
excessive confidence that often characterises TT professionals. As he put
it, ‘computing scientists’ key skills finclude} thinking all answers to
information problems have lire developed since the bieth of the
computer (by them)’ Strathern makes the point that this confidence
derives, in part at least, from the fact that they “possess! ways of
representing reality, even of insisting, that it must be made to conform to
pre-determined schemata of their devising Similar phenomena can be
observed in respect of knowledge managers. One could argue thar this
~ Iee ee
phenomenon has an inherent tendency tw produce negative consequences,
especially where the clients’ needs and views are disregarded by those who
“possess" the dominant model. Among record-keeping professionals, two
models have dominated discourse: the life cycle and the records continuum,
The life cycle model has been influential among record-keeping
professionals since the midlle of the twentieth century? Ie is usually
‘expressed as a progression from record creation, through active use to a
semi-current phase and then toa non-current end point where the record!
may be selected for preservation in an archive or destroyed. In life cycle
thinking, it is generally assumed that records are transferred to an
archive so that they may be used for historical and culcural purposes
after their value for business purposes has been exhausted. The life eycle
model is non-linear: time is not expressed in weeks, months or even years
but in stages. Nor are places (office of creation, records centre and
archive) separated with any great precision. Kelationships within the life
cycle can be viewed as» continuum in which place and time are linked
Thus office and current, records centre and semi-current and archive and
non current arc scen as necessarily linked terms.
The life cycle approach has been challenged by records continuum
models, In its earlier versions the records continuum model constituted
an empirical response to the evident inadequacies of the life cycle. These
included the following:
® Records do not flow in only one direction. Records that have been put
aside may experience a new phase of business use. For example,
records relating to the design of an aircraft carrier may be little used
between the completion of construction and a comprehensive
overhaul many years later. Nonetheless, they take on a fresh currency
‘when the overhaul commences.
Records creation is nor the first step required in a comprehensive
model. System design isthe first, and crucial, stage in a record-keeping
system. This fact was not ubvions ta those whi devived ee life cycle
model because they worked in an apparently stable paper based
environment where the essential design features of record-keeping
systems were often taken for granted. +
‘Some records may be ot value for historical and cultural purposes
while simultaneously being of value for practical purposes. In other
words, the passage of time does not necessarily imply that records
cease to be of value tor business. Tor example, records of propetly
conducted geological surveys have an indefinite life span because the