 |
Effective Approaches for Managing Electronic Records and Archives
Edited By Bruce W. Dearstyne. Lanham, Maryland: Scarecrow
Press, Inc., 2002. x, 174 pp. Index. Available from the Society of American
Archivists, $25.00 members, $35.00 nonmembers. ISBN 0-8108-4200-9.
Review essay published in American Archivist (Vol.
65, No.2, Fall/Winter 2002)
Overwhelming, insurmountable, insoluble. Archivists and records managers
have applied these and many other fatalistic adjectives to the vexing
problem of electronic records management and preservation. Richard E.
Barry, veteran student of the issue and scene-setting essayist for the
volume under review, rightly admonishes us that hand wringing and whining
over electronic records must cease. Archivists and records managers, Barry
emphasizes, “are required to do what needs to be done to properly
preserve and otherwise manage record[s] whether they like the new technologies
that produce them or not” (p. 8). There is no magic bullet nor is
one likely to appear; but, as the authors in this excellent new collection
of essays make clear, information professionals have developed over the
past decade a variety of effective, context-sensitive electronic records
management strategies. Managing and preserving access to digital records
is not and never will be easy; but it is not an impossible task. Government
and corporate archivists and records managers seeking to establish electronic
records programs should take advantage of the sound practical advice offered
in this timely book.
Bruce W. Dearstyne, professor at the University of Maryland’s College
of Information Studies, is both the editor of and a contributor to the
collection. Dearstyne, perhaps reflecting his extensive state government
experience with the New York State Archives and as former executive director
for the National Association of Government Archivists and Records Administrators,
weights the volume towards innovative state electronic records programs;
individuals involved in state level programs produced four of the eight
essays. Robert Horton from Minnesota, Timothy A. Slavin from Delaware,
Alan S. Kowlowitz from New York, and Roy C. Turnbaugh from Oregon recount
recent efforts by their respective states to establish electronic records
programs. John McDonald, former National Archives of Canada information
professional, offers the only federal government and non-U.S. perspective
with his description of electronic records management activities in the
Canadian government. Rick Barry, an independent consultant, provides the
kind of deep background on electronic records management that can only
come from someone who has been grappling with the issue for more than
forty years; while Lee Strickland, an attorney serving as a visiting professor
at the University of Maryland College of Information Studies, summarizes
several of the legal issues affecting electronic records management. Dearstyne’s
concluding essay adroitly synthesizes the issues raised by the other contributors
and offers his own set of prescriptions for building effective electronic
records management programs.
Several themes tie the essays together and can serve as a set of guiding
principles for electronic records management programs, particularly in
a government setting. Perhaps most critical is the concept that Robert
Horton calls “local knowledge” (p. 54). Horton maintains that
electronic records programs, although likely to display a “family
resemblance” (p. 54) to one another, should be tailored to fit the
unique circumstances in which they are being developed. In Minnesota,
with a state government culture averse to regulatory pronouncements and
embracing a “tradition of self-help” (p. 55), Horton concluded
that education and training offered the best prospect for establishing
an electronic records program. Minnesota’s impressive accomplishments,
most notably their Trustworthy Information Systems Handbook, testify
to the wisdom of this approach; but, as Horton emphasizes, the Minnesota
model would not necessarily be the right choice in another state—Delaware,
for example. Timothy Slavin, in his refreshingly honest critique of Delaware’s
initial foray into electronic records management, observes that state
agencies are not using the “Model Guidelines for Electronic Records”
painstakingly developed by the Delaware State Archives. Slavin admits
that the Delaware guidelines, based upon the University of Pittsburgh
“Functional Requirements for Evidence in Recordkeeping,” “have
proven awkward, lofty, and difficult to defend” (p. 46) and “have
been a failure” (p. 45) if judged by their adoption rate. He also
reports that the State Archives may not have possessed enough “local
knowledge” to design a document that would meet the needs of Delaware
state government. Focus group members interviewed to assess the impact
of the guidelines suggested that the state archives “would do better
to recast the guidelines as requirements and issue them as part of an
administrative rule to be incorporated into all system design specifications”
(p. 46). In other words, only if compelled to do so will Delaware state
agencies implement the archives’ recommended best practices.
A second theme permeating the essays is a 1990s buzzword that, far from
being a vacuous cliché, possesses particular resonance in the electronic
records arena: partnerships. All of the essayists provide concrete examples
of the fact that archivists and records managers cannot manage and preserve
electronic records by themselves. In his lucid description and analysis
of the impact of e-government initiatives on electronic records awareness
in New York state government, Alan Kowlowitz illustrates the collaborative
nature of electronic records management work. By working closely with
the Office for Technology (OFT), New York’s primary information policy
agency, the State Archives was able to influence a number of important
electronic records-related policies including e-mail management, document
management, and electronic signatures. The State Archives did not dominate
these policy discussions but, as Kowlowitz perceptively observes, “OFT’s
new role in the electronic records area does not necessarily contradict
or usurp the role of the State Archives” (pp. 98-99). Kowlowitz concludes
that the archives’ role in the age of e-government “is largely
supportive; however, it will also provide an opportunity for electronic
records issues to be raised and perhaps addressed by the larger state
government community, including agencies that can bring considerable resources
and expertise to bear on these issue” (p. 104). John McDonald, who
relates a story similar to Kowlowitz’s in his description of Canada’s
Government On-Line initiative, also notes the diminished role of archivists
and records managers in establishing information policy. Like Kowlowitz,
he acknowledges this development as a reality of the digital era and emphasizes
that the archival community, if it hopes to achieve electronic records
management and preservation success, must redefine its role and establish
strong relationships with other electronic records stakeholders: information
technology staff, budget analysts, auditors, program managers, and, most
critically, chief information officers.
Closely associated with partnerships as an electronic records program
principle is the requirement that archivists and records managers add
value to the electronic records management debate. As Kowlowitz points
out, it is not enough to show up to the meetings; archivists must “earn
their place at the table” (p. 102) by contributing substantively
to the discussion. This does not mean, however, that archivists and records
managers must master the details of every new technology that comes along.
Rather, as McDonald advises, archivists should apply their core competency—a
deep knowledge of records—to information policy issues. Archivists
and records managers are records experts; we know what records are, why
they are important, when they should be captured, how long they should
be retained, what makes them authentic, and how to make them accessible.
This kind of expertise, as all of the essayists observe, is an essential
and often welcome addition to digital information policy discussions and
information systems design.
Yet, Kowlowitz, Horton, Slavin, and Dearstyne remind us that we cannot
rely solely on traditional archival competencies. Archivists and records
managers must develop new skills, techniques, and vocabularies in order
to establish credibility with our technologically savvy partners and to
offer meaningful electronic records management assistance. In addition
to improving our understanding of technology, Dearstyne recommends that
archivists and records managers at all levels of an organization hone
their management, communication, and teamwork skills. He also suggests
that we become comfortable with “improvisation, including an understanding
of how to blend tradition and innovation, a sense of acceptable risk-taking,
and an inclination to take unprecedented approaches and new tacks to achieve
agreed-upon objectives” (p. 148). I could not agree more.
Finally, the essays in the collection demonstrate that electronic records
programs, at least in their nascent stages, must be opportunistic, adaptive,
and open to change. Archivists and records managers have little control
over the information policy agenda and, therefore, must be prepared to
respond quickly to new developments. Guerilla tactics, described by Cal
Lee in the context of electronic records in an article published in the
Spring 2001 Ohio Archivist, are often necessary.
Examples of this abound. Horton describes the Minnesota State Archives’
attempts to take advantage of state government interest in data modeling
and geographic information systems to introduce electronic records management
concerns into the discussion of those topics. Kowlowitz argues that e-government
initiatives across the country offer archivists and records managers a
chance to broaden awareness of electronic records management issues. Slavin,
moreover, hopes to bring an archival perspective to Delaware’s investigations
of data warehousing technology and implementations of document management
systems. Archivists and records managers must use their “local knowledge,”
strategic partnerships, records expertise, and expanded skill sets to
identify and seize all available opportunities to promote the management
and preservation of electronic records.
One caveat. As I write this review my own agency is in the midst of a
budget shortfall that likely will result in layoffs and program cuts.
In light of this, a nagging thought keeps running through my mind. What
impact will widespread fiscal crises in state government have on the future
of electronic records management? Will agencies ignore electronic recordkeeping
responsibilities in their effort to provide services in the face of declining
budgets? Will archivists and records managers, also struggling to make
do with less, eliminate or choose not to launch electronic records initiatives?
We may rest on the precipice of an unfortunate irony. Electronic records
management, as this book makes clear, should no longer be viewed as an
impossible mission. Yet, at the very time when effective and practical
approaches to electronic records management and preservation are emerging,
dwindling resources could hamper the ability of information professionals
to apply those models more widely. To avoid this ironic future, we must
heed Alan Kowlowitz’s advice and refuse to “use the lack of
resources as an excuse for inaction . . .” (p. 104).
Matthew B. Veatch
Kansas State Historical Society
|
|
