Editorial
The final issue of the year always has a theme, and it is no coincidence that in 2005 the theme is electronic document and records management systems (EDRMS). When the Editorial Advisory Board considered potential themes at its annual meeting last year it felt it would be particularly appropriate to explore whether or not EDRMS had delivered what they promised and/or what had been hoped for, given the flurry of activity on EDRMS procurement and implementation in the lead up to freedom of information legislation in the UK. Although we did not intend to focus exclusively on the UK, all of the contributions do in fact fall within this geographic area, and largely within the public sector. No contributions have been offered from the private sector, which is a real pity,as it would be valuable for the profession to know more about the approaches being adopted and the lessons learned from implementations.
Preparing for freedom of information legislation, together with the availability of some government funding, have been key drivers behind an apparent rapid increase in EDRMS procurement over the past two or three years. But that does not mean that all public sector organisations, including large government and educational sector ones, have chosen to implement such a system. Will these organisations be “left behind” or, ultimately, do they have a potential advantage to “leapfrog” those who have opted for the EDRMS solution to the electronic records management challenge? Why do I pose this question? The answer lies in the content of the opinion piece.
David Ryan, writing from a personal perspective, looks at the future of managing electronic records, which he correctly highlights goes well beyond the procurement of an EDRMS because of its complexity. But he is concerned that records managers do not understand this, or perhaps are just not demonstrating that they understand it. And, as IT professionals, including those working for software suppliers, have embraced retention scheduling and other records management concepts quite comfortably, David asks “where does it leave records managers?”. In his article he offers some thoughts and concludes that, whilst there is a future for records managers to manage electronic records, if it is to focus on it will be a vulnerable position. I will leave you to consider David’s final sentence – a potentially controversial one but one with which I personally agree. It would be particularly good if this were to generate reactions or responses in the form of other articles from our readers.
All of the articles in the rest of the issue, however, do focus on EDRMS implementations as this seems to represent today’s reality. In the first one, Gary Johnston and David Bowen provide a general review of selected published and unpublished case studies in an effort to identify the main benefits that can be realised. They do find benefits that have actually been achieved, but also highlight that they have rarely been measured carefully and suggest that more case studies would be valuable. The remaining three articles in the issue begin to redress this gap.
Zoë Smyth, records manager at PRONI (the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland), actually asks the question “has implementing and EDRMS provided the expected benefits?”. PRONI’s project, begun in summer 2003, was one of three lead implementation projects in the Northern Ireland Civil Service (NICS) and the first phase of a process to implement EDRM across all Northern Ireland Civil Service Departments, and 18,000 staff, by the end of 2007. In this case study PRINCE II project methodology was used to re-introduce best practice records management following the ISO 15489 standard and to implement software that met the National Archives UK 2002 functional requirements. In this case study Zoë explains that, in addition to providing lessons learned to inform the wider roll-out of EDRMS, PRONI like any other organisation benefited from an analysis of its records management procedures and as a result has emerged with stronger controls over its own corporate records and current EDRMS experience and expertise which will benefit the NICS and wider public sector bodies in Northern Ireland.
The second case study comes from a very different and in many ways unique organisation – the British Library. Rachael Maguire, formerly the British Library’s records manager, shares the lessons learned in attempting to implement an EDRMS in one department of 80 staff based at different locations,the Estates Department, which might then be used across all 1,500 staff of the British Library. Rachael reviews why, after good initial take-up, two years later only a small group of staff use the system on a regular basis. The reasons given by the non-users are important for any organisation to consider in embarking on such a project.
And for the final case study of the trio we return to another government department in the form of the National Weights and Measures Laboratory, an agency of the Department of Trade and Industry and the smallest UK government agency. David Williams, formerly a chartered engineer, was recruited from the private sector specifically to implement electronic records management at the laboratory. He shares some of the advantages and disadvantages of embarking on an EDRMS implementation following the agency’s parent Department’s high-profile EDRMS project. But the main focus of his article is the process that was followed, the decisions that were taken and an analysis of the outcomes, both anticipated and unexpected.
Together the three case studies provide real insight into planning,processes, project management, challenges and solutions. I am especially grateful to the authors and their organisations for being willing to share not only the successful parts of the projects but also the mistakes or problems. It is only by sharing “failings” that we learn how to do things better.
For all those who are still considering an EDRMS implementation, or similar,the contents of this issue offer not only practical advice in the form of lessons learned, but also food for thought.
The issue closes with four reviews, two of which meet our broader remit for the reviews of professional resources section of the journal. I am delighted that Jackie Spence, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, has reviewed a recent conference of PhD and other research students held at Liverpool University. This was a new and very successful initiative, funded by the UK’s Arts and Humanities Research Council, which it is hoped will become a regular feature of the UK records management and archives research landscape. I am also delighted that Helen Bell has reviewed a growing collection of mainly UK online resources which support the electronic records management and particularly EDRMS implementations. Helen carefully guides readers through some valuable resources and provides an update on recent changes in the area. Catherine Hare reviews Information Nation Warrior: An Information Management Compliance Bootcamp by Randolph Kahn and Barclay Blair, and I have reviewed the final published version of the International Council on Archives’ Electronic records: a workbook for archivists whose title should not deter those readers who would not describe themselves as archivists.
Please do share your reactions to the journal with us – it is only through your feedback and offers of contributions that we can take the journal forward and continue to provide a valuable vehicle for debate, learning and continuous improvement.
Julie McLeod
