15
th
International Congress on Archives
Myburgh
www.wien2004.ica.org
5
Some documents (or information objects) are records, as, according to the definition given above, they provide
evidence of business process and transactions. These must be identified by the records management function.
Some of these have an additional value: they provide evidence of how things were done, and by whom. This is
sometimes referred to as `memory', and this distinction must be made by an archivist.
The glass jar can be described in metadata, as can the strawberry jam. A document and by extension, a record
has content an organisational transaction of some kind and also evidence both content and metadata (which
provides, inter alia, context).
The content of a record - the information it contains can have a strategic and competitive value, thus becoming
the object of interest for Strategic Information Managers and Competitive Intelligence professionals. This makes
this comment by Heald interesting: "I fundamentally disagree with the notion that archives store information: we
store artifacts in which information inheres" (Heald, 1995). This emphasises a document-centred view: however,
it is the typically the information, and not the document itself, that fuels the interest of the user.
Practical convergence between records management and archives
With regard to philosophy and aims...
There are presently differences between records management and archives and these are based around the issues
of cultural, societal and historical dimensions. Capurro supports Frohmann's view that "The structure of our
cognitivistic information theories can be genealogically or 'deconstructively' analyzed with regard to the
institutions and practices of power behind them..." (Capurro, 1996).
As noted previously, archives are political. Archives cannot be seen only as preserving records for historical
research or as a warehouse for old records no longer in current administrative use. The institution behind archives
government or business organisation will provide model for preservation, which frequently suggest keeping
those records which support the dominant position, the metanarrative, or the status quo.
In the previous enlightenment model, where science was presumed to be impartial and determine the truth,
archivists had little choice but to preserve the `party line'. Now, however, archivists can (particularly if informed
by the postmodernist view and driven by social values) attempt to record minority voices, alternative views, and
reasons why certain decisions were arrived at.
Records management emerged out of a modernist, late capitalist philosophy of management in both business and
government. The emphasis is on efficiency, productivity, competitive advantage, strategic value, increase of
profits and avoidance of loss. Management of records an integral part of business processes, associated with
workflow, and is based on administrative and legal necessity.
The continuum model, however, emphasises that as records end up in archives, records managers should have
equal social responsibilities in deciding what is captured and preserved for posterity.
With regard to the people....
The tasks performed by archivists and records managers are not dissimilar in many respects. Both are called upon
to identify which documents (records) they will manage; they need to be careful about maintaining the integrity
(both physically and intellectually) of the documents in their care; they describe and arrange the records to provide
access as well as contextual information; they observe necessary legislation regarding disposal, privacy,
intellectual property and other issues; and maintains the physical (albeit digital) condition of the records. There are
few differences here, in principle.
With regard to the records themselves...
Once again, there are many similarities in principle with regard to the management of the records themselves,
some of which have already been hinted at. Freedom of Information (FOI), rights of access, development and use
of appropriate metadata, thesaurus development, control rather than custody, and functional analysis are all
concerns that are common to both areas. Some areas in which there are still differences are the identification of the
political, economic, social and cultural milieu in which records were created (which is an area which more usually
involves archivists only); and the distinction between primary and secondary evidential values of records.
The primary evidential values are related to the legal, fiscal and administrative purposes of the records, and these
purposes are best understood by records managers; the subsequent cultural, historical and social evidential values
are determined and understood best by archivists. Evidence in the archival sense can be defined as the passive
ability of documents and objects and their associated contexts to provide insight into the processes, activities and
events that led to their creation for legal, historical, archaeological and other purposes (Gililand-Swetland, 2000).
We have noted that there can be various interpretations of this. Evidence for a records manager means that the
record must have sufficient integrity to be admissible in a court of law.
