Blogs

In records management, we put considerable effort into handling records retention and disposition.  I find it interesting that we can so easily talk about long term retention of content – certainly, some records will need to be retained for long periods of time up to and, perhaps, beyond the life of the organization.  For government identities and many businesses, that can mean a very long period of time.  To manage and retrieve records over these long periods of time, there is a need for consistently tagging the content.

For the many of us who have taken over Records Management (RM) departments, we are well aware of the situation.  As new Vice Presidents, Directors or Managers of these functions, we improve policies, procedures and operations going forward in these areas.  Really, this is no different from taking over any other function in our organizations.  What is unique for RM professionals is that we are also still responsible for all of the records that have been previously captured or stored in the past.  Quite often we are asked why we can’t find the records that were created years previously.

During these prior times, it is evident that there was not the records management discipline that we are currently instilling across our organizations.  Documentation for previous holdings? – In some cases, What documentation?

Where there is previous documentation, it often becomes apparent that descriptive terms they were using varied across departments and/or locations.  We often notice that, over time, the descriptive terms used by a department or, perhaps, even an individual has changed.  From this experience, we clearly understand the need for consistency in how we describe and tag our records and other content.

I smile when I hear that we are trying to make all staff records management professionals in managing their content.  Clearly, many people don’t have the management, and analytical, skills and technology awareness required to manage content properly within a records management function.  What is really necessary is that employees’ awareness and perspective of their work products – records and information, must be broadened.  Do employees appreciate that records and information are important assets of the organization?  Do they understand that to find this important information in the future, effort is required up front?  Do they understand that there is a proper place to capture their different files?

It is imperative that employees use consistent metadata – descriptive terms, to identify their physical and electronic records.  A major business driver of electronic records management is the sharing of information across divisions/departments and locations.  The employee in Los Angeles that is looking for important business information should know and understand the metadata that was applied to content in Chicago and New York.

Getting back to our long term retention of records, employees need to know and understand the metadata that was applied years, and decades, earlier is critical to manage and retrieval the business information today and in the future.

A metadata model is a collection of metadata that will be used across the organization and over time.  This metadata are often called the “official terms” that will be used to manage and retrieve content.

From experience, we know that establishing a structure for managing records and information – a metadata model, is often difficult.  Individuals want to use their own jargon and terms they are comfortable with.  This is where the broader perspective of records and information is important.  Content belongs to the organization and needs to be shared by other staff and be retrievable years later.

In condensing the metadata model, having strong senior management support and insuring that all parties share the pain of compromising for the good of the organization are important.

 It is important to recognize that having a metadata model in use in your organization does not preclude other descriptive terms from being used.  The ERM solutions allow additional fields to be created that can hold jargon and individual tags applied by the users.  In addition, synonym rings can be designed in the systems.  With these mechanisms in place, various identified terms can be used and the computer links them to the official term used to manage the content.

I am delighted to see that businesses and corporations are not only talking about the need for a metadata model, but that they have actually undertaken efforts to build and use them.

What has been your experience in developing a metadata model in your organization?

What are your thoughts on the need for controlled vocabulary to manage your records and content?