Why it’s important to have a shared definition of Records with your executive if you want to get funded.

I think we have a problem in Records and Information Management. Simply, it’s that we don’t separate them clearly.

When we don’t separate them clearly, they’re seen as the same.

I think this is one reason we struggle for project funding.

Records projects are fundamentally going to produce a low return on investment, they’re also generally not avoidable – at least if the organisation wants to remain compliant.

An executive continually brought “Information” projects that are actually records projects pretty soon values neither, and is also then surprised when the organisation fails compliance audits.

When a clear shared definition of records management is in place, conversations get simpler.

Records projects are about bringing the organisation into compliance, or reducing the cost of compliance.

Information projects are about improving organisational performance and delivery.

When we don’t tightly differentiate the two of them, Records projects don’t get done, and Information projects are under-valued. No one wins.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s