An uphill struggle
An uphill struggle
Government organisations know effective digital records management is an important goal, but progress remains slow despite a wealth of technical standards and philosophical momentum. David Braue finds out why.
Concerted efforts to improve records management at ActewAGL may have given the public-private joint venture a coherent RM strategy, but the real challenge in getting it used has come not from the technology but from getting users to buy into it.
A single document repository, combining Hummingbird Document Management 5, Records Management, Search & Retrieve and Business Intelligence tools, has provided a ready framework for version control and storage of document-related metadata. Yet while the system is gradually taking hold amongst the 250 users so far given access, Richard Blundell, the organisation's IT applications manager, concedes that getting to this point has taken a lot of hand-holding and advocacy of the technology-and there's still a lot more work to be done.
"We're going through some major changes and initiatives, trying to sell [the merits of] this product and assuring people that it is a good system that will identify where documents are when and where you want them," Blundell says. "But the mindset of people is that they always want to hold onto something tangible. We're getting a management push to get people to send out electronic links [to stored documents], but it will be a number of years before we get to this paperless society."
The experience of ActewAGL, which was formed in 2000 as a private venture between energy provider AGL and government-owned ACTEW Corporation, reflects a broader problem across government at every level: the confluence of Commonwealth, government, departmental, and technical imperatives with issues of user acceptance has created a mishmash of policies that's effectively stalled efforts to impose broad-brush electronic records management initiatives across government.
Finding the clout
That's not for the lack of standards: each state's official archiving organisation has been examining the implications of electronic records handling on records management discipline. There has been a general acceptance of the principles of the AS/ISO 15489 standard-originally developed in Australia-and the Victorian Public Records Office has gone so far as to specify technical standards for long-term document preservation under the banner of VERS (www.prov.vic.gov.au/vers/), launched in version 2.0 in July 2003.
After a decade of recognition that electronic records management is a priority for archiving organisations, translating that recognition into action is still proving difficult.This has been the situation in South Australia, where State Records of SA (SRSA), managed under the Department for Administrative and Information Services, has found it hard convincing individual agencies to share its enthusiasm for records management discipline.
Although it endorses AS/ISO 15489 and has outlined electronic records management requirements in documents like its Adequate Records Management Standard (ARMS), Document and Records Systems Standard and SA Recordkeeping Metadata Standard, many agencies are yet to implement compliant systems or programs.
The result: a few isolated situations where RM discipline is improving. But "in terms of looking for a significant improvement across government, this is yet to occur," concedes state archivist Sam Farnsworth. "We've had one formal round of self-assessments conducted by agencies, but the response from agencies was fairly underwhelming. That told us quite a lot in terms of where they're at, and has developed our thinking in terms of further ways that we can support government to continuously improve its records management over time."
A number of advocacy methods are on the boil: in August, for example, SRSA will host a two-day conference on recording the evidence of government. It is also formulating a model that would see government agencies' records management efforts formally monitored and Ministerially reported on by an external body.
Getting well VERSed
SRSA is also active in the cross-Tasman Digital Recordkeeping Initiative (DRI), a National Archives of Australia-backed effort launched in May to unite state and New Zealand archivists in a common effort to develop what the organisation calls "a single Australasian approach to digital public recordkeeping across all jurisdictions."
As DRI gets down to business, it will be faced with the challenge of establishing a mutually agreeable framework that is both technically possible and widely accepted at all levels of government.
Technical viability has already been demonstrated with the creation of VERS, which specifies standards for records retention that link content with descriptors designed to make sure that records in currently available formats are still readable dozens, if not hundreds, of years into the future. VERS does this by encapsulating content inside VERS Electronic Objects (VEOs) that combine the document with information about the format in which it is stored and metadata about its content.
By structuring its standard in this way, VPRO aimed to free content from a dependency on the availability of applications necessary to view proprietary applications.
At this point, VERS uses Adobe's PDF format as the standard of choice, a selection that was made based on the widespread availability of descriptive PDF documentation that ensures its format can be archived well into the future. VERS also includes definitions of methods such as the VERS Metadata Scheme, VERS Standard Electronic Record Format, VERS Long Term Preservation Formats, and guidelines for exporting electronic records to PROV.
Because of its relatively advanced state, VERS will no doubt form a major part of the discussion within the DRI. But over the long term, the challenge of developing a single standard across many jurisdictions will be compounded by policy differences across those jurisdictions.
SRSA's ARMS guidelines, for example, will go onto the table alongside similar efforts such as Future Proof, a guideline created by State Records NSW that complements the AS/ISO15489-based Designing and Implementing Record Keeping Systems (DIRKS) methodology. Like VERS, Future Proof weighs in on the issue of long-term records preservation but, in line with NSW government philosophy, doesn't set any specific technical standards.
"Some agencies may be selecting formats and implementing business rules that follow some of the approaches taken in VERS," says Cassandra Findlay, senior project officer for government recordkeeping with State Records NSW. "That is fine; we can see a lot of value in the VERS solution, and its metadata approach fits in with the type of metadata approach that we take in NSW. But our [approach] is perhaps less prescriptive in that we haven't decided to settle on specific format, but to leave it open for organisations."
Although it's allowing agencies freedom in deciding how it gets there, however, State Records NSW has been given far more statutory authority than SRSA to get its departments into line. The State Records Act has given the organisation standard-setting and monitoring power over other departments, which must acquire records management systems from government endorsed supplier lists that currently include five electronic records management products.
All use proprietary standards for document and information storage, something that will likely frustrate efforts to standardise data representation using VERS or, as some people argue is best, HTML and XML. Unless common standards are established early in the game-in other words, now-lack of interoperability between proprietary systems will exacerbate difficulties in developing state-wide archiving standards.
Technical standards or no technical standards, progress towards better state-wide records management will depend on many of the same issues as it always has. Findlay says one major driver for uptake of these technologies has been their integration with desktop applications-in other words, user friendliness: "There are much better interfaces with Word, email and other applications, so agencies are taking those options up in increasing numbers."
Here, then, is the challenge for improving electronic information within government: while there is no shortage of official recognition of its importance-and policies, guidelines and standards to support that recognition- adoption ultimately depends on agencies' perception that the systems are easy to use and will be readily accepted by users. DRI will need to keep this in mind as it establishes terms of reference for its activities; otherwise, as ActewAGL and most other organisations have found, even an effort with the broad scope and significant promise of DRI will struggle to make a meaningful difference.
Related Article: