Records for All - Balancing museum records management and archival responsibilities
Francine Snyder, Manager of Library and Archives, Solomon R. Guggenhem Museum
20000+ cubic feet of “archives” records. The reason it’s in quotes: When I interviewed for library position, we talked about archives, but not about records management. I came from orgs where these things were managed by different departments. But later I realized that at Guggen. Archives meant everything sent ot offsite storage.
Is the difference between RM and archives important?
On the screen, letter from Frank L. Wright to trustees. On other side, a box of timesheets. There is a clear difference between these two things. When you’re trained to manage records that are meant to last forever, how do you also manage records with a fixed lifespan.
I began having conversation with staff about their records. They don’t care about this difference. To them, a box is a box is a box. They just want an easy solution for storing and retrieving records.
Thinking about the box is a box is a box premise, we looked at integrating submission process. A key aspect of this was our records schedule. Ours is very basic. We have a general schedule. But when we dug down about departmental schedules, we talked about types of record groups created, and existing departmental guidelines to help figure out what to submit and what not to submit. Using the schedule, we have the same form, the same policies and procedures. This lets us treat all departments as equal with equally important records.
Of course, recognizing differences is important. Once we receive records, there are differences. We verify that new materials actually match paperwork, and then number and enter into Access DB. Traditional treatment.
Likewise for access policies, nonrestricted records are open, whereas restricted are only open to creators.
This is a very simple concept – and many institutions jointly mangeing these things are probably already doing this.
Win, win, win? Biggest challenge is time management. It takes time to do this, and the archivists feel like they would rather be processing collections. On the same thread, it’s easy to spend too much time on records going into RM program and overprocess them.
But this has let us create a unified process. And archivists are always talking about outreach and self promotion. When you work with depts. To create a records schedule, you are sitting down with people who are interested and invested in the process. Also a great time to start talking about the archives and what it is. You even sit down with departments that might seldom use the archives, but it is an opportunity for them to understand it. Legal department is thrilled to have records schedules in place.
The take away: need to define key personnel that need to understand difference between RM and archives programs. Then create detailed policies to assist key personnel n managing these differences. Goal to push out a unified policy to the remainder of staff.
20000+ cubic feet of “archives” records. The reason it’s in quotes: When I interviewed for library position, we talked about archives, but not about records management. I came from orgs where these things were managed by different departments. But later I realized that at Guggen. Archives meant everything sent ot offsite storage.
Is the difference between RM and archives important?
On the screen, letter from Frank L. Wright to trustees. On other side, a box of timesheets. There is a clear difference between these two things. When you’re trained to manage records that are meant to last forever, how do you also manage records with a fixed lifespan.
I began having conversation with staff about their records. They don’t care about this difference. To them, a box is a box is a box. They just want an easy solution for storing and retrieving records.
Thinking about the box is a box is a box premise, we looked at integrating submission process. A key aspect of this was our records schedule. Ours is very basic. We have a general schedule. But when we dug down about departmental schedules, we talked about types of record groups created, and existing departmental guidelines to help figure out what to submit and what not to submit. Using the schedule, we have the same form, the same policies and procedures. This lets us treat all departments as equal with equally important records.
Of course, recognizing differences is important. Once we receive records, there are differences. We verify that new materials actually match paperwork, and then number and enter into Access DB. Traditional treatment.
Likewise for access policies, nonrestricted records are open, whereas restricted are only open to creators.
This is a very simple concept – and many institutions jointly mangeing these things are probably already doing this.
Win, win, win? Biggest challenge is time management. It takes time to do this, and the archivists feel like they would rather be processing collections. On the same thread, it’s easy to spend too much time on records going into RM program and overprocess them.
But this has let us create a unified process. And archivists are always talking about outreach and self promotion. When you work with depts. To create a records schedule, you are sitting down with people who are interested and invested in the process. Also a great time to start talking about the archives and what it is. You even sit down with departments that might seldom use the archives, but it is an opportunity for them to understand it. Legal department is thrilled to have records schedules in place.
The take away: need to define key personnel that need to understand difference between RM and archives programs. Then create detailed policies to assist key personnel n managing these differences. Goal to push out a unified policy to the remainder of staff.
posted by David at
8:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home