1. Cautionary note: it can be easy to forget that information is fixed, like it or not, once it is drawn upon for use/action/decision making. Otherwise, one cannot demonstrate authenticity. That is not to say that the same information cannot be used in different ways concurrently or at a later time. Bridging theory and practice is critical in this area.
2. Unstructured
2.1. Solutions: Search engines rather than classification may be the way forward for records managers
2.1.1. Would appreciate clarification here: how will search engines enable management of retention in accord with record value/business function and and compliance needs? Are not the most effective engines enabled by underlying vertical structures supported by horizontal references and tags?
2.1.2. Tags vs categories mindmap http://www.mindmeister.com/27845500/tags-vs-categories
2.1.2.1. Great illustration of why it is neither one nor the other, but both, that can take us forward. E.g. harness the power of the community in collaborative definition of vocabulary, etc. and build the thesaurus. Of course, the hierarchical structure has never been entirely "fixed" except in rule (versus outcome) oriented organizations. Mechanisms for evolution are a matter of good management.
2.2. Finally, I read what I have believed for a long time simply by observing end users, who prefer and expect keyword search to lead them to the info they need, rather than aimlessly trawl through arbitrarily organised structures requiring vertical search.
2.3. Search engines may well be used by people to find things, structure also helps people to find things and helps to add other disciplines such as retention and security.
2.3.1. An organization doesn't just need to find things; it needs to be able to account for its activities, and this means being able to demonstrate its IM and governance structures and workflows. Classification schemes etc provide the corporate view of its info management / governance, which is very necessary. This doesn't mean that finding stuff is best found by browsing through the structured scheme ...
2.3.1.1. That ought to be the logical case but outside of accounting very few organisations are made to account for their actions holistically - rather individual actions are questioned and this in the US e-discovery as a key driver developed.
2.4. Narrative is the natural form for human interaction and communication e.g. business success - stucturing information is 'unnatural'?
2.4.1. Not necessarily; e.g., in giving directions communication is often far more effectively achieved by drawing a map, which is structured rather than narrative. Similarly with graphs, charts, tables.
2.5. There is no such thing as unstructured information - for it to be information in the first place it has to be very highly structured. The problem is that there are competing structures, based on need, purpose and preference and that, as these are rarely articulated, it is impossible to reach consensus or even establish common ground. We need to create information frameworks that are capable of being structured and configured in an almost infinite variety of ways to suit the needs of all within an organization.
3. Risk management: lies at the heart of information processes and is the solution for RM?
3.1. Not just risk management, but behaviour management. It is no longer realistic to think in terms of managing information at a granular level; what needs to be addressed is the behaviour of information creators and users.
3.1.1. Can agree that workplace behaviours are the make or break point; cannot agree that granular management is not realistic. Overly aggregated data is not the answer. Extreme (real life) example: classification problem perceived to be one of too many choices, so the scheme was aggregated to simply classification. The result was an unmanageable (but easily "filed") collection that necessitated longer retention with associated costs to avoid risk of premature disposition of unspecified content.
3.1.1.1. New rules will ineitably develop to provide systems with a granular approach that enables decisions to be automated. So just as web search engines access information in new ways information can be deleted/managed in new ways. We need to be thinking about the feasibility of the rules and risks.
3.2. Mashups
3.2.1. 'Fixed' information is contrary to new concepts about reusing information
3.2.1.1. Solutions: in fact very little information does merit fixity?
3.2.1.1.1. According to records continuum theory, info can alter its form and become (part of) something entirely different from the conformation it was originally conceived in.
4. Social tools contain limited RM functionality
4.1. Inability to apply retention in automated manner through current social tools
4.2. We have been more adept at developing record creating systems than record keeping systems. Now, it appears that the sheer volume of available information drives the desire (hope?) for "access" to solve problems that require solutions that are not really about access, but rather about management.
5. Deletion on the web
5.1. The book that every records manager wished they had written was 'Delete' It is not currently possible to guarentee that you have deleted things that were previously 'published' on the web. Should it be possible and if so will it become possible.
5.1.1. The joy of digital persistance is that the things people don't want you to see remain. Not so good on a personal level but wonderful when dealing with governmental bodies.
6. New node
7. Professional relevance - as digital assets are stored around the world how will Records and Information Managers in the developed world maintain there jobs?
7.1. Solution: relevance may be high level and strategic but as more people are trained up around the world this case may be difficult to maintain? Is it important to have local records managers for RM sucess?
7.1.1. People will always want a local expert - one of the big jobs of RMers is to be on hand to give advice and training. Think of the frustration and loathing that RM as function would attract if all that was available in terms of help was a far-off call centre with 'advisers' reading from a prepared script ...
7.1.1.1. While agreeing that locally available RM support is a good thing, this exchange illustrates (for me) the lack of recision in the term "records manager". At the management level, the records manager is accountable for ensuring training, etc. but may be less directly responsible for providing it. That might fall to records analyst/trainer positions, classification technicians or a range of such positions. This likely reflects organizational size, specialization of job function, etc. In one organization I led, there were 30 in our RIM program, four of whom had training responsibility. n another, over 100 personnel, two directly involved in providing training to 1300 annually. Advice in both cases came from a "hot line" and from local records officers. In another organzation, advice was given by the management level (where there was little practical understanding of "how to" supported by an outsourced advisory contract.
7.2. To me, the value in the job has to do with ability to interpret the knowledge resource so as to balance compliance and risk management with learning and capacity development. Records management is not something unto itself--t exists within context and the local resource with RM expertise adds value in that sense. Remote storage of data is not records management, it is part of IT management.
7.3. In a lot of developing countries I would rather have a nurse who knows a little RM than a Records Manager who knows nothing about nursing.
7.3.1. Yes and everyone to some extent is a recorkeeper and manager? The professional context and requirements is different though.
7.3.1.1. How many organisations employee more than one records manager? What can one person do? - target and set policy? Should it be a strategic job or should there be some action - IT has all levels?
7.3.1.2. All members of an organisation or records creators and 'manage' records and information to a degree. The Records Manager (and other IM professionals) set the framework and parameters within which the creation and management will occur, and take a key role in EDUCATING and SUPPORTING their organisation's members to create and maintain an adequate record.
7.4. What is interesting is that developing countries may be far enough behind the rest of us not to copy our mistakes and leave a huge digital black hole of information that no longer exist. They may end up with better and more practicle solutions to their problems.
8. Sales and Markening
8.1. .
8.1.1. In practice, only information intended for general public use is extended to general web access. If the question is intended to address web related material used by registered "members" for business purposes, then it is mapped for application of retention management (understanding that users may have captured and separately retained content outside our control).