Records management and data management: closing the gap
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/09565691011039825 |
| Pages | 53-60 |
| Date | 30 March 2010 |
| Published date | 30 March 2010 |
| Author | John McDonald |
| Subject Matter | Information & knowledge management |
REPUBLISHED SELECTION OF ARTICLES
TO COMMEMORATE THE ANNIVERSARY
Records management and data
management: closing the gap
John McDonald
Automated Information Systems Division, Government Records Branch,
National Archives of Canada, Ottawa, Canada
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to explore the information landscape of organizations by
focusing on the evolution of the fields of so-called records management and data management.
Design/methodology/approach – The author draws on his personal experience with the National
Archives of Canada.
Findings – Records management and data management quite literally mean the same thing. There is
no “gap”, as indicated in the title. The only gaps that exist are in the perceptions of what each concept
means and the functions and status of the information jurisdictions that have claimed each for their
own.
Originality/value – The paper recommends an integration of what has been perceived to be the
disparate fields of records management and data management, finding that records or data should be
managed from a global and corporately defined perspective
Keywords Records management,Archives, Document management,Digital storage
Paper type Conceptual paper
The other day I was at a meeting with several government officials to discuss the
establishment of a retention, conservation and disposition schedule for a large,
complex, automated information system. Around the table were users, systems people,
the head of data administration and the departmental records manager. The first thing
that intrigued me about this meeting was that the records manager and the systems
people (including the data administrator) had never met each other, even though all
had worked in the department for at least two years. For someone who was concerned
with launching an initiative that would depend on the cooperation of these areas I was
more than a little shaken.
The conversation that followed was even more intriguing. The records manager
claimed that, pursuant to departmental and government-wide policy, he was
responsible for all the records in the department, including electronic records. Given
this understanding he felt that he should serve as the principal contact point,
coordinator and overall authority for any project that involved the establishment of
schedules for records in automated information systems. The systems people were a
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
This is the text of a talk first delivered to the Society of American Archivists, Annual Conference,
Atlanta, Georgia, October 1988.
This article was originally published in Records Management Journal, Vol. 1 No. 1, pp. 4-11,
and has been republished as part of the journal’s 20th anniversary commemorative issue.
Records and data
management
53
Records Management Journal
Vol. 20 No. 1, 2010
pp. 53-60
qEmerald Group Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/09565691011039825
To continue reading
Request your trial