Title: Identifying personal and corporate information needs.

Subject(s): RECORDS -- Management; PERSONAL information

management
Source: Records Management Quarterly, Jul96, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p20, 7p,
3 diagrams, 1bw
Author(s): Boyd, Fraser
Abstract: Presents an overview of the concepts of personal and corporate
management of information. Terminologies; Function of
information; Collecting information.
AN: 9608144338
ISSN: 1050-2343
Full Text Word Count: 5835
Database: Academic Search Elite

Section: RECORD MANAGEMENT PROGRAM

IDENTIFYING PERSONAL AND CORPORATE

INFORMATION NEEDS
This article presents a somewhat pragmatic view of personal and corporate
management of information. The author suggests that the big picture in records
management is frequently, although not always, the sum of the little pictures. That
is, if every workplace is functioning effectively from an information management
point of view, the overall organisation is more likely to have an effective
information system. The article also presents a redefinition of the words
"information system" which challenges us to think about information as a
commodity with wide use.

We will start by determining what we are actually talking about. Many a time we think we
know what we are discussing, but when we get down to it we have only the vaguest idea,
and that perception is dramatically wrong.

The dictionary on my desk defines information as knowledge, or items of knowledge. At

our most rational I suspect none of us would disagree with that. Another definition I
recently came across was simpler, and possibly more effective: Something that people need
to know and apply to their work in order to achieve their organisation's objectives. If we
really accept those definitions, we will find that our current understanding of the cliche
"information explosion" leaves much to be desired.
My office may be a good place to start. Let me describe it to you. It is relatively small, has
a large storage cupboard, a four-drawer filing cabinet, four of those overhead locker things
secured in a sort of way to the partitions, two under desk cabinets, one with file drawers in
it, and a very large horizontal desk surface with papers stacked on one part of it and a
computer with umpteen megabytes of storage on another.

For support, I have a clerk (or rather I share a clerk with eight other people) who has
numerous filing cabinets and a small library. Supporting her is a central file registry with
literally thousands of files, a very comprehensive library, and access to a library network
system. I could go on, but you probably get the idea. The question is: Do I have good
information?

I believe that I do, but it has to be a qualified answer. The registry and libraries and clerk's
files are very well organised and easily accessible, and in that context I have access to a
great many "items of knowledge which will help me to contribute towards the
organisation's objectives." My desk is a different matter altogether. I have an awful lot of
written and electronic "matter," but suspect that I am not overburdened with items of
knowledge. When I am asked a question, it often takes a fair bit of effort to find the
information needed to justify or even identify an answer. I need both education and
discipline in records management practice.

QUALITY INFORMATION

In preparing this article, I started to think about information from a quality assurance point
of view, which turned out to be quite interesting, so I explored it further. The quality world
has a range of jargon expressions which, like all jargon, have specific meanings to
professionals in the area that are often confused, or regarded as the same, by lay persons.

The generally accepted, non-technical, definition of quality is fitness for purpose. The
definition, and certainly the accepted interpretation of the definition, implies that fitness
includes elements of time and cost because it is not fit for purpose if the cost is higher than
the purpose justifies. The idea of assurance, which is invariably linked with quality,
involves a level of consistency in delivery of the product or service. Finally, the pragmatist
accepts that perfection will rarely be achieved, so the total quality philosophy includes a
requirement that the organisation should be in a state, both culturally and productively
speaking, of continuous improvement. Again the improvement idea is inherent in the
definition because you cannot have assurance if a high degree of excellence doesn't exist.
Therefore, one must continue to work towards that target of ultimate excellence.

An adequate (albeit my own) definition of quality information is: the production of

precisely the items of knowledge required, delivered on time, at a cost which is
relative to its worth, with the information management organisation continually
seeking to improve achievement levels. It is a given that all this is a contribution
towards the achievement of the enterprise's objectives.

The quality disciplines started out in production fields, although the philosophy and
practice have since been applied in almost every field of human endeavour. It can be
helpful, though, to think about information as a tangible product. By the dictionary
definition it is. Items of information are about as tangible as one can get. So I propose
considering how, if at all, we can improve information quality and management by
considering information as a tangible product.

THE FUNCTION OF INFORMATION

First, quality information, like any quality product, is precisely what is required, fit for
purpose, neither more nor less. This sounds simple, but it is interesting to explore even
what that means. If you are buying, say, a microwave oven or a garden hose, you are not
really buying a product at all, you are buying a function--heated food, or water delivered to
a distance away from the tap.

As you move into the more esoteric areas like interior decorating, you buy more product
and less function, and buy less tangible things like beauty and esteem. As you go even
further into, say, live theatre, there is no function and very little product, but a high level of
subjective appreciation. Where does information fit into all this?

I venture to suggest that information is at the very functional end of the continuum. It
doesn't matter what it looks like so long as it can be proven to be valid and provides the
right answer, in exactly the same way that it doesn't matter what your hot water boiler looks
like, so long as it is electrically safe and water tight and hot water comes out when you turn
on the shower.

It is no secret that information that is "pretty" can often be misleading. It can be badly, or
even wrongly, summarised; it can be shown pictorially in a way that gives the wrong
impression; or it can be so poorly set out as to be unusable.

The four graphs in Figure 1 all say the same thing. Yet the information they convey can be
varied at will by changing the scales on the axes. This leads to different interpretations,
which possibly leads to quite different responses, some of which may be demonstrably
wrong.

So information must provide the required function, be accurate and be presented in a valid
and useful way. Another aspect of information management which is common to any
purveyor of function is that, assuming the collector of information and the user are different
people, information has little or no value to the collector unless it has economic value as a
commercial product. Even then, it only has value as a commodity, not for its own sake, in
the same way that a vegetable grower has no direct interest in a heap of carrots. The owner
of the information in the telephone directory, for example, owns a commodity of value as
well as an item of knowledge. The owner of a heap of raw statistics owns nothing of
intrinsic value until a use is identified and the data are sorted into a meaningful product.

Information, therefore, only has value to the user, and the idea of quality information is
totally user oriented. To get value for money in information, the user must know what is
required, what purpose it will serve, and be able to define the form which it must take to
provide the required function. The owner or supplier of information then has to meet that
requirement.

This is a purist doctrine, of course, and does not recognise archives, for example, which are
of value to generations yet unborn, but of little or no use to you or me. In the context of
your daily work, only management has information needs. The information gathering,
storing and analysing element of an organisation, including the archives organisation, has
no pure need for information except as a product of worth to others.

THE FORM OF INFORMATION

There are many situations when a person collects information because it is his or her job.
Usually with such a collection the information is in its original form. For example, birth
certificates for people no longer living have little, if any, value as birth certificates. They
do, however, contain a great deal of information which is of value to researchers in a wide
variety of disciplines from anthropology to genealogy and social science. But because the
user requirement for that information has not been, and indeed cannot be, defined, it is
invariably held in a form which is not immediately useful to most potential users. The
collector or recorder of information is working, to some extent, in a vacuum.

The consequence is that converting data to information involves hunting material out,
matching it to a user need, rearranging it, bringing several sources together and/or cross
referencing and so on. Look at the average government statistical publication. Statisticians
collect all the information they can find and/or afford, then rearrange it in a vast number of
different ways in the hope that most of their customer needs are met. If the maker of an
electrical appliance used that approach, he would produce 273 different models and there
would still be people who didn't get what they needed or wanted.

Therefore: holders, collectors and users of information must work together. How often do
these three groups in an organisation get together? If you provide an information service,
how often do you ask your customers what they want? How often do interested parties
(EDP, Library, Registry, Accounts, Researchers, etc.) get together and discuss what they
have in common, what they can share, where duplication occurs, and so on?

COLLECTING INFORMATION

This leads us to the idea of collecting information in a usable form--registers, for example,
in a spreadsheet format. The old fashioned multi-column ledger had much to commend it
because analysis was so very simple. We need to continue to look for such opportunities.
Even though the computer age provides the opportunity to enter data in any form for
subsequent sorting, there are still effective and economic and ineffective and uneconomic
methods of collecting and entering data. Too many people see electronic solutions as the
only answers. How many people do you know who use a PC to balance their household
accounts, which may be done more efficiently on the summary sheet in a check book?

It is important not to overlook this idea of simplicity, especially in today's so-called

"information age." The ability to store and analyse huge quantities of demographic data is
not necessarily useful to someone who only wants to know the population of his home
town.

Figure 2 is drawn as a continuum, but in reality it is a loop. If it was possible, and it often
is, for the user to define the requirement before data are collected, particularly before
storage, the cost of information management could be reduced significantly. The earlier and
better we can define the user need, the more effective and efficient the whole process is.

Information is a "living" product; it is real, of substance and of value to the user. Hence an
organisation needs to sort out its information needs in precisely the same way that it
identifies its needs for photocopiers, prime breeding stock or workshop tools, depending
what business it is in.

THE REQUIREMENT FOR INFORMATION

Which takes us back to the fundamental question--what is required specifically at our

personal workplace? Too often we don't know, and won't know until we get what we asked
for, or what someone thought we should have, but it wasn't what we needed, or even what
we wanted.

One of the curses of today's information world is the idea that material is "interesting." That
is a terribly bland and ineffective word. Collecting "interesting" information is a very poor
value and a great time waster. There has to be a much better reason. Information must be
useful, of long-term value, of worth in evaluating trends, etc. We really need to struggle to
get rid of "interesting" documents which we will keep on the files because one day
someone will refer to them again--perhaps.

There are many organisations with huge filing systems, big computer data banks, and
armies of statisticians that continually make poor decisions based on inadequate or
inappropriate information. This destroys a cherished cliche. This is not the age of
information at all, it is the age of huge heaps of data which only become information after a
great deal of work. So how can records managers turn this heap into a valuable and useful
product? Or, a better question, perhaps--how do we ensure that what the records department
possesses actually is information, real items of knowledge? How do we encourage the
development of a genuine information age?

THE NEED FOR REAL AND CURRENT INFORMATION

First, what information do users need to carry out their duties? To move towards an answer,
let's consider a typical government department file. It will have a subject named on the
outside, and may have a list of "associated files." It will very likely have a numeric or alpha
numeric identifier, which allows you to say "all the data on subject XXX is in the file series
1234." Note that it's data, not information. But it is easily accessible data which could
become information.
When you look through that file, what a heap of rubbish it is likely to be. It will almost
certainly contain a whole lot of what might loosely be called "trivia." Papers of value to
archivists are of immeasurable value to the history of the nation but merely an encumbrance
to real work. Dangerous, in fact, because it is possible that in leafing through the file one of
the important or worthwhile papers gets missed. So "Lesson One" is to develop means of
maintaining a good collection of information pertaining to your field of subject matter by
isolating the items that are of real and current value from those which are being kept only
because they form part of the total picture of the organisation's activities.

How information is specified, of course, varies with the business. It may be evidence for a
court case, records relating to a variety of subjects, information about business activities or
demographic or economic trends. But until you have learned to isolate the important and
useful from the necessary (but not useful at the moment) and from the "interesting," you
will continue to have a data system, not an information one.

Thus, I keep on my desk a file for each of the subject areas for which I am responsible,
called "key papers." It is a duplicate, which is unfortunate, but it is readily accessible to
anyone who needs it, whether I am there or not, and it brings together the policy statements,
the summaries of information and the items of correspondence which were turning points in
management of that area. It includes minutes of critical meetings, and it has an index of the
various files and a chronological listing of important documents on those files. It also used
to point to magazine articles and other papers on the subject through a listing of known
useful sources. One of the things I found with that latter reference was that I studiously
added to it but never referred to it--which was the end of that.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION

Lesson Two: It is not quality information, in fact it is not information at all, if it has no
value to you or the organisation. The definition of information we are using suggests that it
must contribute to the achievement of the organisation's objectives. There must be some
sort of end use in sight for data collections. Keeping information for archives is a legitimate
end use, but don't be fooled into overstating your own importance. Today's library and
other networks have the means of accessing almost every item of data in the world, and our
small efforts creating an index of magazine articles will almost certainly add little value.

Lesson Three: Direct your enquiries and the subsequent outcome. The same principles
apply, of course, with respect to statistics. Here we are talking about raw data and what we
do with it, and the extent to which you need information which is summarised,
demonstrates trends, or is a precise measure of a situation. It may also be that you only
need exceptions. You need to know certain things about the hundreds of customers who
buy things from your shop each day, you need to know a great deal more about the ones
who come in and don't buy,and about the ones who complain, and even more about the
ones who don't come in at all. So don't clutter things up with detailed profiles of the
customers you know and love. Nurture them, sure, and increase your business through
them, but find out more about the others.
 NEEDED INFORMATION

Lesson Four: Use exception reports. "All is OK except . . . " Exception reporting is a very
powerful tool and produces a high proportion of information rather than data. Take the
simple case of a production management system. Your factory produces widgets. How
many of each type is critical to the operations of the accounting and marketing departments.
Production needs to know that they have made certain promises to the marketing people
and been able to keep them, but they need to know more about what they didn't achieve--
faults reported back, production rejects, material wastage, etc. This is real information
which can lead to better business and production results.

SUFFICIENT INFORMATION

It is impossible to define what the right amount of information is. You will always want
more. It is equally impossible to define what is the right sort of information, you will
always wish you knew something different. Henry Ford probably put it best. He said that he
knew for sure that half his advertising budget was wasted, but he didn't know which half. A
little work, informed measurement, would have provided him with better and real
information about his advertising, allowing him to identify at least some of this ineffective
expenditure. But he had no knowledge of what value it provided. We run too many of our
information organisations that way.

Therein lies the next trap--and the need to keep this information thing in perspective. It is
so easy to add to your information bank in two ways:

Your customers want more information, or different information, or information in

a different form--which latter two invariably are interpreted as being additional to
what you get at present.
Your customers seek, or are given, or are sold additional information just for
interest's sake. I learned this when, as a young parent, I helped with a paper drive
for my son's scout troop. It was in a rural area, and what was really astonishing was
the number of magazines which had obviously been stored for years and then
thrown out in their original wrappers. This was data (not information) which had
been paid for, but never used in any form. How many of us know managers in the
same category. They get several, if not dozens, of magazines or reports in their
particular line of expertise, which stand in a heap in a corner of the office but are
never referred to. What is worse is that such people lock this material up in their
data store, denying others the opportunity to turn it into information.

EFFICIENT INFORMATION

I contrast this approach with that of a colleague who browses absolutely everything he
comes across, and either photocopies the odd page or tears it out of the magazine and files
it using his own system. He is an entrepreneur and innovator, and when someone comes in
with a weird question, he can always find where someone has used an idea in a way that
could be adapted to this problem. He really stores away and uses information.
As an aside, I don't think that I am contradicting what I said before when I suggest that we
should all learn more about browsing and filing away snippets so that they can be found.
They are not information if they are not accessible. So to own information you first need to
identify it by reading it efficiently to assess its worth, then filing it effectively. Efficient
reading is one key to acquiring good information whether we are talking about magazine
articles, technical treatises or official reports.

It doesn't matter whether we are discussing statistics, magazine articles, or massive dumps
from the Internet. There are four types of data to be defined in this analysis:

* What you absolutely need.

* Nice to have general data.
* The great mass of raw data.
* Rubbish.

Obviously, each of these types moves about in both directions. Things you want or need
now will have served their purpose in a year or so or will have become obsolete and/or
dangerous.

You may have asked your library, for example, to get all the information it can on
microfiche use and technology. You long ago made your decision not to proceed with a
micro-media approach, but you still have subscriptions to magazines, you're on lots of
mailing lists, and reps from several firms call on you twice a year. And your filing cabinet
is full. Turning information sources off is as important as turning them on.

INDIGESTIBLE INFORMATION

For some people a collection of indigestible statistics or other data is sort of status symbol.
We need to find ways out of that bind. We need disciplines, decision models, the strength
to look at a document and decide that it is doing nothing for us or our work, and ensure that
we cease to get such material.

Then there is the mass of raw data you will collect. A while ago I had the privilege of
hearing a presentation by the Deputy Editor of the Australian "Canberra Times." He told us
that every day his newspaper receives, in one form or another, although mostly paper, some
4 million words which people think are essential for his paper to produce a balanced report
on life in the Australian capital. Of that they are able to print about 100,000 words. They
then need to resolve issues of storage, media, access, retrieval, disposal of dross and so on.

Most of us will not reach these volumes, but our problem has a similar perspective. We will
have a mass of data, solicited and otherwise, relevant or not, useful or just plain clutter. The
average executive of today, in data terms, will identify completely with Henry Ford.
 SOURCES OF INFORMATION

To my very great regret, rubbish is not readily identifiable. Obviously, some is, and we
really do need to get rid of the "garden shed" mentality with respect to this data. It is more
important to have access to the source than to have access to the data itself. For example,
Government Statisticians put out masses of detailed information on demographics, wage
rates and other matters which are of great value and interest to many people. It is important
to know what is available in those stats and to have access to a database when you need it.
It is less important, and much more expensive, to file in your own storage space, every
monthly abstract, copies of yearbooks back to the year dot and so on. If you are measuring
trends, measure them, record the source of the information, then get rid of it because you
can always get another copy.

One of the things our clerk does, for example, is recognise what information is referred to
frequently, and she has a system for dealing with the rest. One magazine, for example, I go
back to time and again, so she keeps a twelve month stock. Another one I only return to
rarely, so she keeps the last two copies, and when one comes in she throws out the older of
the two. She rarely gets it wrong, but if I do have a need for something older, she can
always call up a library copy or go back to the publisher or distributor. Even at some cost
that's better than storing the material.

SHARED INFORMATION

We are in the trash and treasure business. What is of no use to you may be gold to someone
else. Information sharing is useful and important if you are going to get the best value from
it. So anything you see that looks useful, send it on, with a polite note, "You may be
interested in this."

It is important, however, that this also be controlled, not just be an addition to an already
huge problem. One of the things that really annoys me is receiving photocopied magazine
articles or newspaper cuttings from well meaning but unidentified colleagues. I want the
ability either to encourage them to send me more, or to say, "Thank you, but it doesn't
really help." That cut off mechanism is really important in improving the quality of internal
information exchanges. So share information, but share it selectively and deliberately.

INFORMATION POLICY

Many organisations have a records policy, in fact most do, although all too frequently it is
driven solely by the requirements of the tax man, not by the information needs of the
company or the good of the nation. Some organisations have an archives policy. Relatively
few have both, in an information management sense, and those that do often don't see them
as a whole. A good records retention policy recognises one as the continuum of the other.
Items cease to be information ("items of knowledge") and become simply records, or a
resource to refer to, and ultimately become archives. That's the way it should be, but it is
critical that this material remain accessible through a good indexing system and physically
accessible within a reasonable time frame. Off site storage is necessary, even essential, but
we do need to know what's there.
What I am suggesting is that it is what is between the boxes in Figure 3 that is really
important, rather than the information identified in the boxes. Storing information, data,
etc., is easy, if somewhat demanding physically, but developing and maintaining effective
access is something else again.

This article is not about retention schedules and all the other things of that nature that good
records managers use to turn their records into archives, but nonetheless the amount of
rubbish still in files must be seen to be believed. There are people who believe that
absolutely everything that comes into the office must be filed. If you bring out such a
person's files, you will find a whole heap of trade brochures and an equal number of letters
saying things like, "Thank you for drawing my attention to your very interesting Product.
We do not appear to have a use for it at this time, however. . . ."

INFORMATION RESPONSIBILITIES

In a global sense, responsibility for ensuring that archives are maintained properly is an
important matter. The issue is not keeping records and information, but ensuring that there
is access to information when needed, by any person who is entitled to it. You need a
method of identifying obsolescence and dealing with that, and some form of guarantee that
information exists and can easily be obtained if required. Given this assurance there is no
need to keep it on hand.

The summary of all this is that every person at his or her workplace and every organisation
needs an information policy. It must set out the who and the why and the what and where
and, in particular, the when of information management. This article has concentrated on
pieces of paper, but the rules apply equally to lists of numbers, computer disks and every
other medium you can think of. And while at the records management stage one could
argue that everyone should be responsible for management of their own material within
well-defined rules, there must be central management as soon as those records become
archival. As we have seen, good archives management starts where an item of information
is produced. That includes accounting records, order forms, correspondence, etc.

The current issue in this is fax. Fax is said to account for as much as 20% of a company's
communication costs, but little is done to control this expenditure. The other thing that isn't
done is managing fax as a record in many companies. It is regarded, like the telephone, as
an informal medium and often not recorded, where a letter saying and doing exactly the
same thing would have been filed in triplicate. Pulling all this modern technology together
and identifying and managing real information are urgent needs.

All in all, a personal and organisational information policy is needed. This is emphatically
not the same as an information systems (IS) policy, which most larger organisations do
have. Most IS policies talk about media--computers, CD ROM, micromedia, disaster
recovery, access protocols, etc. They rarely discuss information. That's much the same as a
company travel policy which discusses whether the executives will have BMWs or
Mercedes and how much petrol allowance they will get, but doesn't concern itself with the
purchase of airfares.
An IS policy without an integrated and structured information policy is poor value--it is a
means of collecting and possibly analysing data without management of either the inputs or
the outputs.

THE VALUE AND WORTH OF INFORMATION

There is a lot more to be squeezed out of our definition of quality information. Timeliness
in information systems is almost always inversely proportional to bulk and form, which in
their turn are directly related to storage media and location. These various aspects of
information management are an integrated whole. More is almost always worse. Culling,
sorting, indexing, and identifying of end user needs are all important features of good
information management.

The cost of information is always an issue with management, and records managers must
operate at maximum possible efficiency simply to prove their worth to their managers. But
there is another issue in this, which is cost in relation to worth.

Consider the Hollywood mogul, who is an obvious caricature, but nonetheless instructive.
"Time is money," he says, "and I want that information NOW." So he surrounds himself
with acolytes. He is right, time is money. The faster he wants it, the more resources he
needs to obtain it. The more haste, the higher the cost. And frequently it's a status or power
thing, not a need.

There is a need, then, in most organisations for a better definition of what information is
required, when it is needed, and its cost and worth to the organisation. In some cases there
is a genuine need for rapid information dissemination. The detective working on a major
crime needs certain information to allow the case to proceed, and there may be a very high
cost, even total failure, in not having it. A proactive information system is essential.
Business needs are often more routine. Does it need to be an instant daily, weekly or
monthly report? And in what form? Can the need and the form be determined at the point
of collection, thus minimising rework?

Finally, continuous improvement. It could legitimately be argued that, if a quality product

or service is being delivered, there is no need to improve, but the fact is it is always
possible to improve both the service and the way it is delivered. It is therefore important
that any definition of information needs includes the needs at present and a vision, or more
likely, a short to medium term objective of improvements in areas where such
improvements can add value to the organisation as a whole. To take a simple example, the
information available to your organisation now may be adequate for it to perform to the
levels required, but better or faster knowledge of worldwide trends may provide some
competitive advantage, so working towards that improvement is a legitimate information
management goal.

SUMMARY

A good definition of information requirements at all points in the organisation is essential.

Let's think of it again in commodity terms:
Take a dining room table. It may consist of a top, legs of various shapes, a variety of
varnishes, etc.

You can stock a number of finished tables of several alternatives of each variable,
requiring, say, ten finished tables in the show room and some for special orders. There is a
high cost to this, but delivery is instant. In an information context, this is having
information sorted and indexed to a high level of detail, available, often at the press of a
key. It is expensive because a lot of work will be done that may never be used.

Or you can have the tables made up, but not varnished or whatever. You have a lesser
number of items, but a delay of a day or two to finish them and a lower cost. This is the
more generic filing system that needs a bit of sorting through and statistics held in the form
the raw data was received, or even collections of documents that have not yet been sorted
and analysed. But the information is there when the requirement is identified.

You can have dining room table kitsets held in the shop or back at the factory with only a
sample in the shop, which have a still lower cost and longer wait. But, this being the lowest
level of service, you would want to be looking towards ways of improving the service while
maintaining the costa continuous improvement goal. And that is probably my friend with
the heap of magazines on the floor--not really an information system at all, but ripe for
organising and sorting so that the data contained can become information --that is
knowledge, which is needed to help the organisation achieve its objectives.

PHOTO (BLACK & WHITE): Fraser J. Boyd

DIAGRAM: Figure 1--How To Distort Information

DIAGRAM: Figure 2--The Information Loop

DIAGRAM: Figure 3--The information Continuum

~~~~~~~~

By FRASER BOYD

Fraser J. Boyd started his working life in the Royal New Zealand Air Force as a
photographer. After some 18 years he sought a career change and trained as an industrial
engineer, a discipline in which he has practiced since 1975. Records management is one
area in which he has developed a particular interest as part of methods improvement work
in a range of applications in the New Zealand Defense Forces. He has recently also been
given responsibility for development and application of quality assurance policy.

Copyright of Records Management Quarterly is the property of Association of Records Managers &
Administrators and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without
the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.
Source: Records Management Quarterly, Jul96, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p20, 7p, 3 diagrams, 1bw.
Item Number: 9608144338