Blogs

What is the Function of Format?

By Lisa Ricciuti posted 04-26-2015 11:41

  

As RIM professionals we’re taught to apply principles, best practices, and standards regardless of format.  Even though format sometimes requires us to accommodate unique characteristics, it’s understood that everything falls under the same umbrella.  For example, when devising retention rules, the retention is applied in the same way to a record series whether the record is in a physical or electronic format.

I always find this logic becomes a bit flawed in a few scenarios, especially when it comes to destruction.  I’ve conversed with a number of people who are quite comfortable to shred the paper only because they know the information is still available electronically.  I once had a conversation with a lawyer who told me he typically didn’t keep his drafts when they used to be done on paper with edits & comments.  He then added he would keep electronic drafts because it seemed easier and took up less space than paper.  If the information really is important enough to keep then the format should be a consideration, not a determining factor. The decision to retain records should be based first on a legitimate need and not on format by default.    

In 2012 I taught a course on RIM Basics at a local college.  During one lesson I led an activity with the students on organizing household records to demonstrate the applicability of classification schemes and retention schedules.  When we got to the retention portion, one student explained he would shred paper bills and bank statements after a year, but would keep the electronic versions indefinitely.  He decided he didn’t need the paper because it took up too much space and it was difficult to locate what he needed.   Whereas he believed he could find what he needed electronically through keyword searches.  I did point out that finding what you need is based more on having a good system set up, rather than being able to perform keyword searches, though this is a distinct advantage available with electronic formats.

The other place I see logic flaws with regards to formats often happens when I’m discussing folder structures, or metadata elements, with users.  During one project I asked the users how they would like to see their folder structure organized.  One of the users listed a few options that were all subject- or project-based and then said, “Email,” as though it deserved its own place just because the format was different.  I pointed out that the email was likely to be about one of the subjects or projects and it would probably make sense to file the email with the thing it was supporting.  

I’ve also observed that many users like to have presentations separated by format.  In this scenario the format, usually PowerPoint seems to matter a lot to users when discussing options for organizing their business records.  The content of the presentation, or where it was presented and by whom is almost always a second thought to the users when thinking about how they would search for that presentation in the future. 

It’s easy for me to be critical of others using this flawed logic, but I’m guilty of it myself in some areas.  For example, if I had to manage and organize physical photos, I definitely wouldn’t keep so many of them.  I also wouldn’t produce the same amount, so maybe it would all balance out in the end.

Although I wouldn’t think to organize my records by format, it does become part of my searches to narrow down options.  Format is a necessary consideration and a critical piece of metadata, but I wouldn’t base retention solely on format, nor would I allow users to create folders called “email” or “presentations.”  So what function does format serve?  What is the best way for RIM professionals to incorporate this vital piece of information in a way that satisfies our requirements and user needs? 

Please read more in a free book from AIIM, What are the Uses of Email: Addressing the Challenges of Email Management

0 comments
25 views