Blogs

Most RM professionals expect to apply the same collaborative pre-approval workflow used for disposing of boxes of physical records stored off-site to electronic records according to recent Gimmal surveys and conference calls with RM professionals. The most frequent reason given for needing the pre-approval process is to check for pending or threatened litigation, audits, or open records requests which could require attention from multiple stakeholders, especially legal.

Among those with experience applying the pre-approval approach to electronic records, there were mixed results: "We tried a pre-approval process tied to the record's author and provided quarterly reports and notifications when records were eligible for destruction. If the records needed to be retained longer, record authors were asked to check a box. If they didn't check the box, the records would be destroyed. This was very cumbersome because people leave the organization or move to new positions. Many were unwilling/unable to make a decision. We have discontinued the process for now and are trying to come up with a streamlined, consistent, and automated approach for disposing of both electronic and physical records."

Though in the minority, there are strong voices among RM professionals who think applying the paper process to electronic records won't work: "I believe that our profession will have to come to terms with the fact that we can't exert controls over the entire electronic environment. To think we can do so is delusional."

Is a risk-based approach possible in which organizations focus on records that expose them to the greatest risk and apply controls accordingly? We're planning a more extensive analysis of the survey and conference call data including business (use) cases in a white paper on electronic record disposition. Your comments and suggestions are encouraged.