Lessons from Down Under: Records Management in Australia.

Records managers in Australia face many of the same issues and challenges as do their counterparts in the United States. In this article, a North American records manager currently teaching in Australia reflects on the differences yet similarities in records management practice in the United States and Australia. This article focuses on three areas for comparison: the records continuum, which is the prevalent records management theory professed in Australia; the day-to-day issues facing the records manager in Australia; and electronic records management issues.

Things are different in Australia. Actually, they are different and yet the same. The terms and labels used to identify items and even processes may be different, but the items and processes tend to be familiar. This is especially true with records management practices.

Records management in Australia is very similar to records management in the United States. Upon researching records management in Australia it becomes abundantly clear that there is a very progressive and aggressive approach to recordkeeping practices in that country. Australians take recordkeeping very seriously and in some ways, generally speaking, have better control over their records than do records managers in the United States.

A clearer understanding of the differences and similarities is possible by focusing on three basic areas: the prevalent records management theory professed in Australia, the day-to-day issues facing the records manager in Australia, and electronic records management issues in Australia.

The Records Continuum

The records continuum is the prevalent records management theory professed in Australia. The Australian Standard for Records Management, hereafter referred to as AS4390, defines the records continuum as "The whole extent of a record's existence. Refers to a consistent and coherent regime of management processes from the time of the creation of records (and before creation, in the design of recordkeeping systems) through to the preservation and use of records as archives." (AS4390.1[4.22])

The Australian continuum model is just beginning to gain momentum. Until 1996, most official documents regarding records management principles and practices discussed the records life cycle approach. Steering the continuum into the prevailing model position are some very dynamic theorists: Monash University's Frank Upward, Sue McKemmish, and Barbara Reed; and their colleagues, David Roberts from the Archives Authority of New South Wales, and Chris Hurley, acting Director and Chief Archivist of the National Archives of New Zealand. As a result of these individuals' writings and teachings, the continuum has been the records management model adapted by the National Archives of Australia and AS4390.

These theorists have a very different view of the life cycle concept. They believe that in the life cycle model, records are managed in very separate and distinct, somewhat systematic, stages that end with disposition. The records go from stage to stage, almost as if in some jerky, assembly-line like, syncopated rhythm, until they come to the disposition stage, at which time they are either destroyed or transferred to an archives. Further, they contend that the life cycle model suggests that archival records are no longer managed in the records management arena once they hit the door of the archives.

This misinterpretation of the life cycle theory can be easily understood when one reviews the definition put forth in the book Information and Records Management: Document Based Information Systems. In this book, authors Mary Robek, Gerald Brown, and David Stephens defined the records management life cycle thusly: "Most records are of temporary value; that is, like most organizational assets, their value for business purposes tends to decline as time passes and, at some point, they become useless and may be discarded.... If it is to be effective, a records management program must apply appropriate controls to records during each of the five major stages of the life cycle of information."

"A new road map for electronic recordkeeping," is how Upward described the records continuum in his unpublished paper "Applying the Records Continuum to Electronic Recordkeeping: Terms and Concepts for a Base Structural Model." In the paper he explained the continuum as follows: "A continuum approach contains the premise that the way things are formed is the way things are, unlike a life-cycle approach which assumes that entities go through a series of stages. A continuum involves looking at layers of development. The archives is the archive, is the record, is the document. The document can be the record, can be the archive, can be the archives.

Records do not move in distinct stages in the continuum model. Records can be in several of the four dimensions and an archival record is an archival record regardless in which dimension the records may be. The four dimensions are document creation, capturing documents as records, organizing memory, and pluralizing memory.

In other words, the continuum theory purports that records should be managed whether they are in offices, records centers, or archives, and archival records should be managed as archives as they are being created in offices. This is a central issue of the continuum theory and one that proponents insist is missing from the life cycle theory.

Some contend that the life cycle theory already advocates this notion. If a series has been identified with a permanent retention period, the records manager should be advising the organization to manage that series from the beginning of the life cycle in ways that cost the organization less throughout that record's permanent retention. Thus, the continuum model and life cycle model are indeed similar.

In the 1998 textbook Records Management: A Guide to Corporate Recordkeeping, Jay Kennedy and Cherryl Schauder described the continuum as it has evolved over the last couple of years:

   The records continuum model focuses on the management of records as a
   continuous process which includes the creation of the records. It sees the
   need to manage records from the perspective of the activities which they
   document, rather than visualizing it in consecutive stages, which is the
   emphasis of the life cycle analogy. It looks at managing records in the
   light of such questions as what records need to be captured to provide
   evidence of an activity, what systems and rules are needed to ensure those
   records are captured and maintained, how long the records should be kept to
   meet business and other requirements, how they should be stored, and who
   should have access to them.

Kennedy and Schauder went on to explain the four dimensions that Upward used in his concept of the continuum model:

1. "Records of business activities are created as part of business communication processes within the organization (e.g., through e-mail, document management software, or other software applications)."

2. "Records that have been created or received in an organization are tagged with information (metadata) about them, including how they link to other records."

3. "Records become part of a formal system of storage and retrieval that constitutes the corporate memory of the organization."

4. "Records that are required for purposes of societal accountability (e.g., by corporate law) or other forms of collective memory become part of wider archival systems which comprise records from a range of organizations."

There have been past references to a records continuum theory. It is unclear whether the Australian model is derived from these other references, but there are definitely similarities. For example, Jay Atherton wrote an article entitled "From Life Cycle to Continuum: Some Thoughts on the Records Management-Archives Relationship." (Archivaria, 1986) Atherton, who is from Canada, asserted that there are eight stages to the life cycle. The first four stages are in the records management phase and include the creation, classification, maintenance and use, and disposition stages. The final four are in the archival phase and include the identification and accessioning of archival records, arrangement and description, preservation, and reference and access stages.

Atherton stated that the life cycle approach "ignores the many ways in which records management and archives operations are interrelated, even intertwined." Atherton suggested that this theory be replaced with a "simpler, unified model consisting of four rather than eight stages, and reflecting the pattern of a continuum, rather than a cycle." This model's stages would be creation, classification, identifying and applying retention schedules, and the maintenance and use of records. These stages would be "interrelated, forming a continuum in which both records managers and archivists are involved, to varying degrees, in the ongoing management of recorded information."

Atherton noted that the life cycle's stages are segmented and with modern records this model is no longer appropriate. "With electronic data," he wrote, "the stages in the life cycle cannot be separated. The nature and volatility of the recorded data will not permit it. Creation, for example, is an ongoing process rather than an event in time."

A review of Atherton's continuum model illuminates the similarity between it and the Australian model with regards to the desire to encourage records managers and archivists to work together to manage records. This can be further illustrated by reviewing what Sue McKemmish said about the continuum in her paper "Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow: A Continuum of Responsibility," which she presented at the 14th National Convention of the Records Management Association of Australia:

   A continuum is something continuous of which no separate parts are
   discernible, a continuous series of elements passing into each other. A
   records continuum perspective can be contrasted with the life cycle model.
   The life cycle model argues that there are clearly definable stages in
   recordkeeping, and creates a sharp distinction between current and
   historical recordkeeping. The records continuum, on the other hand, has
   provided Australian records managers and archivists with a way of thinking
   about the integration of recordkeeping and archiving processes.

   In Australia, the records continuum has provided a way of articulating a
   mission that brings records managers and archivists under the recordkeeping
   umbrella. Records continuum thinking focuses on the unifying purposes
   shared by all recordkeeping professionals, defined as to do with the
   delivery of frameworks for accountable recordkeeping regimes that enable
   access to essential, useable evidence of social and business activity in
   the business, social and cultural domains.

Again, similar yet different. The life cycle concept advocates care and control of records throughout the life cycle, from creation, maintenance and use, through disposition (not to disposition).

Records, like living organisms, have life cycles. They are created or received (born or adopted). This stage includes the preconception planning, gestation, pre-adoption planning periods. At this stage, their physical form (paper, electronic, magnetic, or photographic) and informational content are established. Records are then used and maintained (maturity). They are filed, accessed, re-filed, and occasionally reformatted or reorganized. As records become less necessary for the daily operations of the office, they are often transferred (retirement) to inactive storage. They are perhaps taken off-line or taken to a records center (nursing home where they are occasionally visited). Sometimes they are sent to an organization's archives (the retirement center where they still provide information about their pre-retirement lives and have useful knowledge for other activities as well). Sometimes, the records are just destroyed (death.)

An effective records management program provides efficiency and economy in recordkeeping practices, and ensures that unnecessary information is destroyed or not even created, and that important information is preserved and available for reference. This means that the creation phase of the life cycle is the most important phase of an effective records management program. It is during this phase that consideration should be given to whether the information needs to be created. If it does, how long will it need to be retained? These questions must be answered in order to determine the least costly and most efficient way to create and maintain the information so that it will be available throughout its life cycle.

Ira A. Penn, in his article "Understanding the Life Cycle Concept of Records Management" (Records Management Quarterly, 1983), explained that all stages of the life cycle must be considered before a record is created. (Note that this article was written several years before Atherton's article and the start of the Australian continuum's momentum.) Wrote Penn, "The most important question you must ask yourself when thinking of creating a record is do you need to create it. And then, if the answer is yes, you can start thinking about how to create it and about the other phases of the life cycle ...

"[T]he life cycle is a `cycle' for living purposes. Of course a record won't die before it's born. But at the same time, it must be realized that this is not a cycle for planning purposes. If you wait until it is time to file to consider filing, it's too late. If you wait to consider archival preservation until the paper has disintegrated, you've lost the battle.... [The stages] are not distinct independent elements. They cannot exist alone. The segments are interrelated and interdependent.... The elements blend with one another."

So the life cycle is not segmented, neither is the continuum. The elements need to be considered before the record is created in both models. Again it is evident that the two theories are similar yet also different.

The Day-to-Day Issues

The day-to-day issues encountered by records managers in Australia are similar to those issues encountered by records managers elsewhere. They deal with the establishment and carry-through of recordkeeping policies and procedures. They analyze workflow processes and assist in the redesign of operations involving records. They interpret the laws and regulations pertaining to recordkeeping: such as their Freedom of Information, Evidence, and Privacy Acts. They conduct records inventories or surveys and develop records retention schedules, have records centers and archival functions, work with imaging technologies, and all of the other functions that their U.S. counterparts do.

In Australia, there is more emphasis on managing and controlling active records, and on classification and indexing processes. This may be because the British registry system is still used in Australia, especially in government agencies. This is a system where records are logged in when they arrive into an organization and as they are created. Registration in most cases involves the use of an auto-mated records management system. Today's registry system has evolved and in most cases not every single document that arrives or is created is registered. The process of registering documents is used only for those documents of certain division, topics, and/or types of records.

Records managers in Australia are used to keeping very close track of every single record. (In fact, they often express horror when told most U.S. organizations do not register records.) However, recently, in some organizations, the activity of registering records has devolved from the central registry to the department receiving or creating the records. In these agencies, the records manager has expressed the concern that the records are not always registered or put on the system. Access to these records has diminished and there is fear of losing control over some recordkeeping practices.

Electronic Records Management in Australia

This is one area where the Australians are ahead of their counterparts. This may well be because they are quick to embrace new technologies and their absorption with the registry system. Whatever the reason, there is something to be learned from them in regards to managing electronic records.

In 1991, the Commonwealth Government's Information Exchange Steering Committee (IESC) published a report entitled Information Needles in Government Haystacks. This report summarized the results of a survey of some government agencies regarding the management of electronic documents. It showed that information was not being managed when it was in an electronic format. According to the report, there was no coordinated approach to managing electronic documents; each agency had its own autonomous way of handling their electronic records. It further revealed that people did not know who was to manage the information/data or how. It also indicated that there were problems with basic records management issues (e.g., document versions), security, and other legal issues.

The IESC also established the Electronic Document Management Subcommittee (EDMSC) to address this report and to develop guidelines. The subcommittee ultimately drafted two important documents on the subject: Management of Electronic Documents in the Australian Public Service in 1993 and Improving Electronic Document Management: Guidelines for Australian Government Agencies in 1995.

The latter document defined documents as "recorded communication with recognisable [sic] structure, on any medium, intelligible without further processing except for presentation on screen or on the printed page. Not all documents, however, are records in the archival or legal sense."

Improving Electronic Document Management: Guidelines for Australian Government Agencies (which is available at <http://www.adfa.oz.au/ DOD/imsc/edmsc/iedmtc.htm>) also identified and defined four different types of documents found in governmental agencies -- corporate, working, personal, and private. The corporate documents are the ones that are considered records in the archival and legal sense: Corporate documents are all documents which are used "in the course of its business and are judged to have ongoing value, including all documents kept for legal and audit requirements, and those which originate outside the agency, when they have reached a stage of development and quality which warrants them becoming part of the corporate record. Depending on security requirements, these documents should be readily accessible to those who need to use them.

"Corporate documents are seen as being an important asset of the organisation [sic]. They must be identified and controlled by agency procedures and registered, recorded, and stored for corporate access. Corporate documents are kept in a corporate data store. This may be physically distributed, but has common document registration and access control requirements."

When corporate records are registered, they are captured into a recordkeeping system. This process includes capturing the necessary metadata to ensure the content, context, and structure of the record is complete, accurate and reliable.

AS4390, the document that provides Australian records managers with the guidelines to best practices discusses this capturing process in section 8.4.2:

   Electronic records are distinguished from electronic documents by their
   transactional context (they are created within business transactions) and
   evidential purpose (they are kept as evidence of that activity). Electronic
   documents are normally managed through data and document management
   techniques and tools, including electronic document management software. An
   electronic document becomes an electronic record when it takes part in a
   business transaction, and is kept to provide evidence of that transaction.
   Thus a report prepared using a word processor remains a document until it
   is submitted, when it becomes a record. It may still be retained and used
   as a document, for example, as a basis for a new document. To function as a
   record, however, it must be captured into an electronic recordkeeping
   system and must incorporate relevant structural and contextual information,
   as well as content.

Although this differentiation between the official records of a business and the working documents is not unique to Australian records managers, it is definitely more defined.

This distinction between official records and working documents aids in reducing the size of the job of managing records. Some records managers in North America are saddled with a records definition that encompasses everything. For example, the following definition is common among governmental organizations: "books, papers, maps, photographs or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics, made or received in pursuance of law or in connection with the transaction of business." This makes the task of managing electronic records seem very onerous.

In summary, by reducing the magnitude of the task -- by narrowing the definition of a record or official record -- and by being accustomed to capturing every record into a recordkeeping system (the registry), it becomes clear that Australian records managers have been very progressive in their approach to managing records, especially electronic records.

Regardless of which theory one supports, the life cycle or the continuum, the bottom line is that records managers and archivists must work together. Records must be appraised before they are created and managed accordingly. If it takes a new theory to ensure that records are managed appropriately, then it is time to look at the continuum and what our colleagues in Australia are doing.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Atherton, Jay. "From Life Cycle to Continuum: Some Thoughts on the Records Management Archives Relationship." Archivaria. Winter 1985-86.

Information Exchange Steering Committee. Management of Electronic Documents in the Australian Public Service. 1993.

Information Exchange Steering Committee. Improving Electronic Document Management: Guidelines for Australian Government Agencies. 1995.

Keeping Archives. 2d ed. Edited by Judith Ellis. 1993.

Kennedy, Jay, and Schauder, Cherryl. Records Management: A Guide to Corporate Recordkeeping. 2d ed. 1998.

McKemmish, Sue. "Yesterday, Today, and Tomorrow: A Continuum of Responsibility." In Preserving Yesterday, Managing Today, Challenging Tomorrow: Proceedings of the 14th National Convention of the Records Management Association of Australia. 1997.

Penn, Ira A. "Understanding the Life Cycle Concept of Records Management," Records Management Quarterly. July 1983.

Playing for Keeps. In The Proceedings of an Electronic Records Management Conference hosted by the Australian Archives. Edited by Stephen Yorke. 1995.

Robek, Mary E, Brown, Gerald E, and Stephens, David O. Information and Records Management: DocumentBased Information Systems. 4th ed. 1996.

Standards Association of Australia. Australian Standard: Records Management (AS4390). 1996.

Upward, Frank. "Applying the Records Continuum to Electronic Recordkeeping: Terms and Concepts for a Base Structural Model." February 1996.

Laurie Sletten, CRM, CA, has more than 18 years of experience in records and archival management. She has a master's degree in archives administration and has served as a records manager/archivist at Oregon State University, the Oregon State System of Higher Education, and Harvard University. She currently teaches at the University of Canberra. She is experienced in developing policies and procedures pertaining to records/ information management issues, developing and coordinating records retention scheduling and disaster recovery programs; and managing microfilming and records center operations and all archival functions.