Think about it. How often do you check your e-mail? How many messages do you send? Now multiply that by the total number of people in your organization. Did you need a calculator? Everyday organizations transmit millions of messages both internally and externally through electronic messaging systems. Some messages are simple - a reminder to attend the meeting at ten o'clock or an invitation to a co-worker's retirement party. But more and more messages carry substantial amounts of information and serve as official records of the organization.
When you get a piece of e-mail that you believe is important, what do you do with it? Do you print it out? Do you save it in a special folder in your e-mail account? What does your organization's e-mail policy tell you to do? Most institutions that have considered the need to retain information from e-mail generally instruct employees to print important messages and add them to the paper file. Is this really the best solution? Will it allow your organization to retain and maintain its institutional knowledge? Will it provide appropriate levels of access and security? Will it help your company or organization defend itself in the case of litigation?
As a records management professional, no doubt you already realize the variety of problems to be solved before e-mail records management is as common as paper records management systems. For instance, most people treat e-mail as a casual, information medium, more like a phone call than a memo or report. How will you as the organization's records manager make your coworkers understand that they are creating records? How will you persuade your colleagues to sort through their e-mail and classify important messages as records? How will these email messages be captured into a records management system for proper retention? What should happen to attachments and hot-links to websites? How will you handle data migration? Most importantly, how will you convince senior management to provide the resources and support for solving the e-mail records management problem?
For one month, nine researchers in the Graduate School of Library and Information Science at the University of Texas at Austin attempted to define the state-of-the-art in sound records management and archival practice as applied to Internet-based e-mail messages. We investigated the ways that industry analysts, private and public sectors, professional associations, universities and research institutions, and vendors implement e-mail records management principles from both a technological and a policy perspective. The results of our research include basic legal issues surrounding e-mail records management, technological concerns, the results of our research, and a synthesis of the current state-of the-art with recommendations for the future.
FUNDAMENTAL LEGAL ISSUES
People typically use e-mail as a quick and convenient way to engage in a wide variety of business activities, including discussion and revision of policies and procedures, circulation of draft documents and meeting minutes, distribution of work assignments and schedules, and actual business transactions. While many organizations have enthusiastically embraced the opportunities provided by e-mail, the vast majority overlook the fact that when e-mail messages contain evidence of business decisions, actions, and transactions, they become documents which are subject to the same legal requirements, restrictions, and standards as any record produced in any form or medium.
The implications of the failure to incorporate e-mail into a records management program are most clearly seen in litigation. The 1970 amendment to Rule 34 and the more recent Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure require that lists of all relevant paper and electronic documents, in a useable form, be transferred from one party to another early in the process of litigation (Jessen and Shear). If e-mail documents concerning a subject of litigation exist, whether in print, on someone's hard drive or network system, or on backup tapes after the messages have supposedly been deleted, they are subject to discovery and must be produced upon request. Failure to produce documentation in a timely manner can result in severe sanctions. In addition, the organization may have to face the possibility that the court could give the plaintiff physical control of the equipment upon which the relevant information is stored in order to see if they are able to extract the relevant records for themselves.
The actual process of searching unmanaged and unclassified electronic data can be an enormous financial burden. In re Brand Name Prescription Drugs Anti-Trust Legislation, 1995 U.S. Dist, LEXIS 8218, *1-2 (N.D. Ill. June 13, 1995) the court ordered the defendant to review some 30 million pages of e-mail stored on backup tapes and bear the estimated $50-70,000 search cost. The court felt it unfair to expect the plaintiff to pay for the retrieval access which the defendant ought to have foreseen when designing the system (Hagberg and Olson, 1997). In another ongoing lawsuit the defendant must bear the cost of reviewing 10 years worth of backup tapes, though in this case the price tag has been estimated at $3 million (Rosenberg, 1997). Judges attempt to balance the potential cost of discovery with its likely benefit, but threat of discovery has become a very powerful negotiating tool.
E-mail handled in a public agency is subject to not only the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, but also to the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Privacy Act of 1974. FOIA grants the public the right of access to all records not excluded by a specific exemption, while the Privacy Act requires that agencies identify and protect all records which contain personal information. Additionally, government records are subject to the Records Disposal Act which governs the creation of General Retention Schedules by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) and the standards for disposal. The General Retention Schedule (GRS) covers electronic records in Section 20 and includes procedures concerning the retention of e-mail. NARA's policy states that after e-mail has been copied to a paper, microform, or electronic recordkeeping system able to capture transmission and receipt data for recordkeeping purposes, it is permissible to delete all versions of the e-mail messages and associated attachments that meet the definition of federal records after the expiration of the authorized retention period or when no longer needed, whichever is later. Any electronic record which is not covered by GRS 20 may not be deleted without the approval of NARA. As will be discussed later in this article, this policy is in the midst of a court challenge, the outcome of which has yet to be determined.
A number of technological issues related to attachments compound the problem of managing e-mail records. Attachments make it possible to send from person to person anything from a word-processing file to an office floor plan, to a sound or video recording in an e-mail system. We examined two primary difficulties with attachments: transmission format and document format.
When transmitted through Internet e-mail, attachments are encoded in one of two forms, either the older Unix-to-Unix encoding (uuencode) or the more modern Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) standard. Most modern mail systems can handle either format, but organizations need to ensure that their employees (and any records management system) have the tools to receive and decode attached documents. If the existing e-mail system is unable to deal with one or both types of encoding, several commercial and shareware software packages can aid in the decoding process.
A more vexing problem is the plethora of document formats. A simple word processing document could be in any of a dozen different formats, or different versions of the same format. Organizations need to outline in policy what types of files should be sent via e-mail, and then ensure all employees have the necessary software to view or use those files. Of course, there will always be exceptions to the organization's standards when messages and attachments originate from outside their walls. But, many software packages are able to handle translation or direct viewing of unusual attachments.
No matter which technological solution to e-mail records management is selected, once an attachment is saved into a records management application, the organization must retain some capacity to decode that file for the duration of the required retention period. Considering the continuous and incredible rate of change in the software industry, this presents a daunting task. Organizations need to develop policy to either keep a system in place that can view older or esoteric file types, or to migrate those files to another format when new standards emerge.
Forrester Research Inc. (1997) reports that in 1992 approximately 2% of the U.S. population enjoyed access to e-mail. Now 15% of the U.S. population uses the application. The company anticipates that this growth will continue and that, by 2001, 135 million people in the United States will be communicating through e-mail and that, in five years, e-mail will reach 50% of the U.S. population. Organizations will have to deal with problems of access and technological obsolescence, legal issues, and questions of confidentiality, reliability, and authenticity, including encryption. However, failure to navigate these issues will put organizations at great risk of losing significant records and/or being bankrupt by electronic evidence discovery (Barry, 1997). In light of these issues, we investigated the ways that industry analysts, private and public sectors, professional associations, universities and research institutions, and vendors address e-mail records management from both a technological and a policy perspective.
We contacted a number of industry analysts and records management consultants regarding state-of-the-art practices for managing e-mail messages as official organization records. Our questions regarded state-of-the-art policies, procedures and technologies for managing e-mail; why these practices were effective; why related literature focuses on conceptual models for managing e-mail rather than case studies; and whether some industries more effectively manage e-mail due to the litigious or regulated nature of the industry. We also asked Richard Barry of Barry Associates, Derek Miers of Enix Consulting Ltd., and Kimberly Barata and David Bearman of Archives and Museum Informatics to make projections regarding the future of e-mail management.
Our experts agreed that organizations and users rarely consider the evidential nature of e-mail and rarer still have a policy in place relating to management of electronic messages. Informal corporate policies or cultures often dictate printing significant e-mail to paper, though many organizations lack a paper-based records management program, leaving users without guidelines for determining the nature of the record or its required retention. More commonly, all e-mail regardless of its significance is either backed up or deleted en masse. "State-of-the-art" in practice, therefore, was defined as simply recognizing the need to develop policies and procedures for capturing e-mail as records within an electronic environment. Respondents cited numerous sources detailing the requirements for effectively managing e-mail as a message, mentioning. in particular, the Australian Archives and New South Wales government as having developed comprehensive and effective guidelines and policies. The analysts also identified Ann Balough's "Managing E-Mail" in The Records and Retrieval Report and Michael Sutton's book, Document Management for the Enterprise, as innovative approaches to developing policies and implementing procedures for e-mail, as well as David Bearman's 1996 article "Item Level Control and Electronic Recordkeeping," and his book, Electronic Evidence: Strategies for Managing Records in Contemporary Organizations. Barry and Associates also maintain an informative website that covers the myriad of issues surrounding this topic.
Although the requirements for effectively capturing e-mail as a record are well-developed, the respondents agreed that case studies are lacking. Document management systems (DMS), workflow software, and records management applications (RMA) promise a powerful combination of features to manage e-mail, but few, if any, studies of their effectiveness have been completed. Furthermore, according to industry expert Ann Balough, no off-the-shelf system delivers all the needed functions (1996, 12). Unfortunately, many organizations believe DMSs fulfill their records management requirements in spite of the fact that these systems lack most records management functions. Rather, organizations must customize a distinct RMA to their DMS and workflow software. While feasible, integrating DMS with RMA can prove difficult and costly, especially if users are not given adequate training and knowledge of the records management requirements of the organization. Kimberly Barata also expressed the need for more developed metadata to identify, control, and maintain access to records within DMS and work flow applications (1997).
The analysts also discussed the disparity between the status of records management in organizations and the organization's expectations for managing electronic documents, including e-mail. Many organizations do not adequately support records management of traditional media, yet expect simple, comprehensive solutions to the increasingly complex problem of electronic records. Kimberly Barata states, ". . . You cannot cope well with electronic recordkeeping systems if you can't cope well with records in general (1997)." To manage e-mail effectively as a record, one needs to combine organizational goals and needs with user behavior, technological systems and characteristics, and the larger records management functions of the organization. As with any successful records management program, all levels of the organization must be involved.
All respondents expect the use of e-mail to rise exponentially as electronic systems become increasingly sophisticated, further complicating the management of e-mail. David Bearman describes a likely scenario if public and private organizations, records managers, archivists, and information professionals together fail to meet the challenges of electronic records, "If the paper world is any indication, most of the systems will be inadequate, unprotected, and poorly architected and will cost more than they should and as much as an organization is willing to pay" (Bearman, 1997).
Considering the complex nature of this project and the number and diversity of sources available in the private sector, an effective research strategy was important. We chose to seek out businesses and corporations that use e-mail in the daily course of operations. First, in order to elicit responses from a wide range of businesses in the private sector, we posted a preliminary survey to three listservs (Records Management, Archives, and Special Libraries/Division of Information Technology Engineers). Our results showed both that many businesses are struggling to provide comprehensive e-mail management programs. We then monitored the message traffic on the listservs for the duration of the project, contacting those who seemed knowledgeable about e-mail practices directly. Finally, as a complement to the survey, we contacted professionals in both local and national businesses by telephone and e-mail who may not have received the survey. We targeted corporations considered leaders in their respective industries and who might have invested in sound e-mail retention practices.
Respondents to the survey confirmed that organizations use e-mail to carry out important business decisions and that the problems surrounding the management of e-mail have been recognized. In the absence of a comprehensive technological solution, a standard response has been to instruct users to manage their own mail actively or print important messages out to paper.
All the professionals we interviewed identified user education, awareness, and compliance as formidable obstacles to overcome in enforcing an effective policy for managing e-mail records. The enormous volume of e-mail transmitted daily at a corporation such as Microsoft precludes a workable scheme for managing e-mail messages company-wide. Instead, the Archives group at Microsoft is actively targeting divisions of the company where the most important business transactions take place, such as the executive offices, public relations, and market research, in order to educate users and establish policies for managing e-mail. In addition, the group encourages employees to mail specific types of e-mail (such as documentation of policy shifts) directly to the Archives (Dirks, 1997).
Incorporating an effective, enterprise-wide policy for managing e-mail will most likely have its roots in applying a specific set of solutions to a specific set of problems at the workgroup level. Two representatives we spoke to from a major credit card service company have constructed a Microsoft Access database for storing and organizing their e-mail messages. In essence, the database functions as a "profile" of e-mail transactions by indexing the messages using relevant header information (date sent, sender, addressee, response date), while the actual messages are stored in folders in the Microsoft Mail utility (Erickson and Ward, 1997). The Access database is by no means an operational records management program per se, as it neither addresses retention and destruction of e-mail records nor groups them by record series or content. The decision to save each message for seven years is motivated by legal requirements rather than by a judgment of its value and usefulness to the company. The Access database, however, can be seen as an interim solution to managing records in a large and decentralized corporation, and it certainly indicates that businesses do experiment with innovative ways of managing their e-mail. Smaller, central, shared databases built for workgroups that are similar, using software found on every employee's desktop, could serve as a model for managing e-mail on a smaller, context-sensitive level, and could eventually serve as a model for a corporate-wide e-mail management strategy.
Storage location, classification, and retention are among the other most pressing concerns in the management of e-mail. Microsoft, for example, stores e-mail messages on its servers, which are backed up every night to tape (Dirks, 1997). The problem then becomes how to manage the data tapes, and how long to retain the backups themselves. Although e-mail may be stored in a central database or on tapes, typically no efforts to classify or group messages to facilitate searching by header information are being made, except minimally by employees who file messages into folders within their existing e-mail system. Inconsistent and random classification of messages, and the absence of a retention schedule for e-mail stored on servers or tapes make retrieving messages for discovery purposes very difficult, time-consuming, and expensive. More importantly, many businesses rely on hard copy printouts of significant e-mail messages, belying the trust most profess in the paperless environment. One respondent clearly identified the cause of such lapses as a failure of records managers fully to accept electronic systems as capable platforms for records management (Murphy, 1997).
Another significant issue raised by professionals in the private sector is how to determine retention periods for e-mail messages. One records manager who works regularly with e-mail systems suggests that companies should only store messages for five to forty-five days (Wallace, 1997). He also warns against backing up messages on a server, reasoning that if the data in the message were important enough it would have been printed and that leaving too many e-mail messages in the system is akin to providing counsel with a smoking gun in the event of a discovery request. In contrast, the Information Access Manager at Coca-Cola informed us that their retention period for e-mail is eighteen months (Johnson, 1997). The extended period keeps printed records to a minimum. After eighteen months, the sender of the message is prompted by the system to either delete the message or approve it for storage for another eighteen months.
Although many companies eagerly await innovative technological solutions to their e-mail problems, they have already begun taking steps to address policy development and employee education. A successful e-mail management program should maintain that email must be treated in the same manner as any other form of office communication; essentially, the content of the message, and not the medium, should drive retention decisions. Most professionals we contacted, however, would prefer a software solution to the problem of managing e-mail. Businesses will have to work aggressively with software vendors to develop products that will fit with technology already in place and integrate well into an existing record retention program. Although most of the companies who responded were not currently using document management software and were not aware of any off-the-shelf products that provide records retention and destruction functionality for e-mail, Chevron identified ForeMost and TRIM as two software programs which do seem to be addressing retention and disposition issues. Chevron is now engaged in testing ForeMost in-house (Snyder).
The Public Sector
The legal requirements for government entities to make their records available to the public require that records are managed in an organized and consistent manner. Our examination of e-mail management in the public arena focused on policy and implementation in the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. We reviewed a selection of policies by national and state (or territorial) entities, representing national and state archives, state libraries, universities, state legislatures, and one national standards body. Documents were in final or draft form and included guidance documents on the implementation of policy or legislative mandates. We conducted our research on the World Wide Web and through e-mail and telephone interviews with knowledgeable individuals. While hardly exhaustive, our search produced a number of interesting observations.
The Australian Guidelines on Managing Electronic Records as Documents is an excellent primer for implementing e-mail records management beyond print and file. These guidelines suggest that the creator of an e-mail message may be required to classify it as a record or non-record before being allowed to send it. The Australian Archives' Records Management Systems Working Group has issued a Request for Proposal for a Whole of Government Records Management System. The Group intends the document to be a survey of vendor capabilities and interest. Results are expected to be available later this year (Australian Archives, 1997). Standards Australia's recent publication, Records Management Standard AS 4390, has little to say about email other than to specify that sender/recipient/date/time information, as well as links to accompanying and related documents, must be maintained along with the text of the message.
Managing Electronic Records, by the National Archives of New Zealand, is an extremely thorough document which might serve as a short text on the management of electronic records by encouraging organizations to move to electronic recordkeeping on an agency-wide basis. Where agencies still maintain a primarily paper-based record system, the Archives advocate using the print and file approach for all electronically generated documents, including e-mail. Their intention is to avoid confusion created by parallel record systems, and to maintain a single point of access to records created in all media. The Archives strongly suggest maintaining with the records complete documentation on the computer systems, software applications and organizational procedures used to produce and maintain the records (National Archives of New Zealand, 1997).
In Canada, the government has encouraged the search for an e-mail management system. The Electronic Work Environment Management Board, established in 1994 to provide guidance for general office automation, unanimously chose to advocate a document management system with recordkeeping functionality which would encompass a variety of media and security levels. E-mail was included as a matter of course. The Board produced a detailed document which precisely described the requirements and criteria for government shared software (RDIM, 1996). Among the requirements are the ability to receive, capture, store, profile, search for and retrieve documents of all types. The specified criteria include the ability to track disposition instructions and intervals, the production of audit trails, and the provision for detailed technological requirements.
Canadian agencies began experimenting with ways to implement these standards even before completion of the proposal (Electronic Records Management Initiatives, 1996). Statistics Canada is implementing an integrated electronic/paper system that builds on the existing paper system. Users direct email and attachments to a records management mailbox where they will be classified, weeded, sequenced and/or linked as appropriate. The resulting database will be key-word searchable. Paper documents will be electronically imaged for entry into the system. The Canadian Radio-Television Telecommunications Commission has had a central text repository since 1992, and the software product RIMS version 4.3 has been installed to manage the records. The Commission is in the process of selecting a document management system to link with the existing records management application and hope to create a data warehouse linked to both the document and records management systems. As a final example, Human Resources Development Canada is exploring the use of ForeMost's records management software in a pilot project to address workflow, email, and systems and records management from a unified perspective.
Theory and implementation of email management procedures lacks uniformity in U.S. state and federal agencies. The New York State Archives and Records Administration issued the most thoughtful state policy, a document discussing how to create an e-mail policy and what issues to consider when managing e-mail (Managing Records, 1995). The most substantial issues include whether or not to choose e-mail as a format for communication or transmission, criteria to consider when selecting software and setting up a system, ensuring security and authenticity of the messages, and considerations regarding filing, retaining, maintaining, and disposing of e-mail messages. The email management guide produced for the Maine State Government, though not as complex as the New York guide, involves the same issues and is written and organized in such a way as to act as a useful tool for employee education (Electronic and Voice Mail).
E-mail records policy in most U.S. federal agencies ranges from complete lack of internal policy to variations of the standard set by GRS 20, discussed earlier (Rossman, Pollard, Wolfe, 1997). The agencies which follow this standard, for example, the State Department and the Environmental Protection Agency, save email messages in their e-mail or document management software for a brief period of time, printing and filing messages (including headers and attachments) which require a longer retention period. Few agencies are wholly satisfied with this solution, but few have any other option. The multiplicity of e-mail systems within a single agency, the lack of the technology needed to manage e-mail electronically, financial concerns, and the need to wait while litigation involving the relevant federal regulations is resolved means that progress will come slowly.
Litigation with significant impact on federal e-mail records policy began in 1989 when Scott Armstrong issued an injunction to prevent the Executive Office of the President (EOP) from destroying the backup tapes of the IBM PROFS e-mail system used by the agency. Armstrong wanted to ensure that data on the tapes, which had been instrumental in the Iran-Contra scandal, underwent archival review prior to disposition. The EOP maintained that the tapes could be destroyed because employees printed any e-mail records. The Court ruled in favor of Armstrong in 1993 (Bearman, 1996). It held the PROFS system had been used for substantial business communication but had not been treated as a recordkeeping system. No e-mail records policy existed, and staff had not received adequate training in the management and destruction of e-mail records. Most significantly, the Court held that a printed copy of an e-mail message is a convenience record, as the electronic version often contains more information (particularly header and transmittal information) and has a more flexible format. Ultimately the ruling called for paper and electronic records to be scheduled for retention separately, and held that electronic records are subject to archival review as federal or presidential records. The Court's decision was appealed and upheld.
In 1995, the National Archives and Records Administration published GRS 20, giving federal agencies authority to adopt the print and delete method rejected in Armstrong v. EOP. Public Citizen, Inc. filed suit against the National Archivist, John Carlin, in response. The plaintiff argues that GRS 20 fails to comply with the Records Disposal Act by authorizing the destruction of e-mail records without regard to content, preservational value, or proper retention periods. As long as this case remains in litigation, GRS 20 remains the most recent formal e-mail retention policy which can be implemented by institutions with varying technological resources. Many agencies adhere to its procedures. On the other hand, most agencies are aware that the policy is highly inadequate for the scope and scale of their e-mail problem, and some have created more complex programs for internal use.
The Department of Defense stands out in the search for greater capability in effective e-mail management. Now in draft form, DoD Standard 5105.2, Department of Defense Design Criteria Standard for Records Management Application Functional Baseline Requirements (1997), provides guidelines for use in the procurement of records management application software. Email management is treated in the draft, including a table designating the location of typical e-mail metadata in the standard records management profile fields. Until the resolution of Public Citizen vs. Carlin, the draft will likely remain unfinished.
Nevertheless, the Department of Defense continues to test records management application software for its compliance with DoD Standard 5105.2. In one special case involving a secure electronic communications system, the Defense Messaging System, the military may be prepared to underwrite significant development costs. The Office of the Secretary of Defense would like this system to include a software package which captures all e-mail, including attachments and header information, performs some indexing or classification, and accommodates security and encryption requirements, all completely transparently to the user (Arnason, 1997).
A system to have been implemented in late August 1997 at the Army Medical Department Activity at Ft. Hood, Texas is EDIS (Electronic Document Information System), a product of Information Systems Integration Services. Chosen because it incorporates document management and records management capabilities in one product and was designed to be compatible with military records management practices, the system allows capture of the entire e-mail message including header information and attachments (as word processing documents), classifies e-mail as a record or non-record, ensures the integrity of items classified as records, and provides a customizable menu of file series to which records may be assigned. The system notifies the record owner and records manager as records come due for disposition and provides pointers to related records. At Ft. Hood this system was to run on an Oracle database which would allow full text searching. The developer planned to incorporate a web browser into the system which, presumably, would allow the capture of web pages behind hot-links embedded within an e-mail message (Tyler, 1997). If successful, this would be the most sophisticated product we have encountered in the public sector.
We contacted eighteen professional associations representing the records management, library, and information science fields, as well as the electronic messaging and information systems industry. Researchers reviewed the Internet websites of these organizations and contacted a representative of each by telephone or e-mail, hoping to find examples of associations working to develop both policies that address e-mail as records and technical solutions for achieving this goal. We asked contacts to identify whether their particular association had addressed the issues surrounding e-mail records management and, if so, to identify which committees, work groups or task forces were working on solutions. Of the 18 professional associations contacted, seven stated that to varying degrees, they had begun working on the issue. Six associations did not respond, and five others indicated that they were not working on the problem of e-mail messages as records at this time.
Associations Stage of Work Association of Records Managers and Task force is working on Administrators, Inc. (ARMA draft policy. International) Electronic Messaging Association Paper nearing publication. (EMA) Information Technology Association Unknown. of America (ITAA) International Council on Archives Working on a policy for (ICA) electronic document's of all types. North American Serials Interest Work on a policy has been Group (NASIG) assigned, but not yet begun. Nuclear Information and Records Planning a task force to Management Association (NIRMA) work on e-mail records guidelines. Society of American Archivists (SAA) Working on policy for electronic documents of all types.
The associations specifically addressing e-mail records are in various stages of work, ranging from plans to create a workgroup through a paper undergoing final edits. One association, the Information Technology Association of America (ITAA), noted that it did have a task force or work group set up to address the problem of e-mail records management but, for reasons of confidentiality, declined to comment on what innovative solutions might be available (Miller, 1997). A request for further information about the form or nature of the work group has, to date, received no response. Another association, the North American Serials Interest Group (NASIG), has given the association's archivist the job of preparing an e-mail records policy, though that work is not yet underway (Ivins, 1997).
The Association of Records Managers and Administrators, Inc. (ARMA International) E-mail Task Force was proposed in March and constituted in September of 1995. Work on the guideline began in January 1996. As a courtesy, the Task Force provided our research team with a pre-publication draft of the guideline. The document indicates that ARMA International does not intend to tell records managers how to implement an e-mail records management policy, though this is treated briefly. Instead, the document outlines the issues which must be addressed while such a policy is under development. It emphasizes that no one policy will work in every organization, and that e-mail records must be managed "within the context of an efficient and effective records management program."
Implementation, according to the draft document, may be incremental or global in scope, and may occur through three possible technological solutions for e-mail records management. The "high technology" solution involves a customized document management system which would require users to indicate whether an e-mail message was a record before it could be sent. Identified e-mail records would be forwarded to the records management system. At that point, either records management staff would have to examine messages individually to apply proper classification and retention, or artificial intelligence in the records management application would be employed to complete classification and retention automatically. The latter solution places the least burden on e-mail users.
A "middle technology" solution requires saving e-mail messages in electronic form off the e-mail system, perhaps in dedicated directories on the network. Records management staff would then review and classify the records. The "low technology" solution is to print email messages to paper and file them with related paper records, which would place the greatest burden for e-mail records management on the user, and eliminate the "intelligence" of the electronic document (ARMA International Draft 1997).
ARMA International intends to promote the final version of this guideline as a standard for adoption by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) and the records management industry. Before the standard can qualify for possible ANSI adoption, the Association is required to conduct a public review and comment period to solicit input from the industry. Although this part of the cycle has not yet been scheduled, interested parties are invited to check ARMA International's home page (www.arma.org) for updated information in this standard.
The Nuclear Information and Records Management Association (NIRMA) may soon undertake a similar effort. Bruce F. Evans, Chair of the Electronic Records Subcommittee, indicates that he is hoping to create a specific working group within the Subcommittee to address e-mail records management (Evans, 1997). Like many other records managers, his perspective is that e-mail is "nothing more than a records generating system, similar to any other word processing program. Using this approach we need to control the output of the system rather than the system itself" (Evans, 1997). He would like to have the results of the working group's effort published in a technical guideline and then, possibly, in an ANSI standard for the nuclear industry. NIRMA may also submit the technical guideline as a proposed standard to ISO.
A brief response from the Electronic Messaging Association (EMA) indicates that this group is close to publishing its work on e-mail records management. A user requirements paper is in final review by the Message Retention Workgroup of the Messaging Management Committee. The paper will reportedly discuss the limits of management within electronic messaging systems, as well as provide guidance to vendors working to add features for e-mail records management into their software (Reardon, 1997).
Consistent with Evans' view of email, the International Council on Archives (ICA) and the Society of American Archivists (SAA) have included e-mail in their efforts to develop guidelines for managing and preserving electronic records in general, rather than create a separate e-mail policy. To date, the ICA Electronic Records Committee has produced three documents on the subject. In addition, a new committee called the Committee on Electronic and Other Current Records is currently drafting its program of work. According to John McDonald, committee chair, one of the initiatives of this new group will be to develop the practical guidelines for managing electronic records, which were originally to have been published in the Guide for Managing Electronic Records from an Archival Perspective (McDonald, 1997).
The SAA has not published specifically about the problem of e-mail records management. However, much of the information available at the organization's website includes electronic messages with other types of records to be preserved in an archive (SAA). According to Tom Ruller of the SAA Electronic Records Section, "We focus on how to manage and preserve any electronic records, regardless of their transport medium. Electronic mail is just the most prevalent vehicle for creating and transporting records in electronic form" (Ruller, 1997).
Universities and Research Institutions
Faculty and students at several universities have studied the problems inherent in electronic records. Possibly the best representative of this research, the Pittsburgh Project, carried out at the University of Pittsburgh School of Information Sciences, represents an effort to "derive from the law, customs, standards and professional best practices accepted by society and codified in the literature of different professions concerned with records and recordkeeping" (Pittsburgh). Participants included lawyers, auditors, records managers, information technologists, managers, and members of the medical professions.
Like the DoD-STD-5015.2, the Pittsburgh Project is not a working recordkeeping system, but rather a guide and definition to what such a system should include. The result of their effort, Functional Requirements for Evidence in Recordkeeping, provides a set of criteria that a system for keeping electronic records should meet. The project includes a comprehensive bibliography on electronic records that should prove an invaluable resource for anyone interested in this topic. Underscoring the point of e-mail as just a type of record, Dr. Margaret Hedstrom (1997), associate professor at the School of Information, University of Michigan, stated in an interview that management of electronic mail will not go very far "if the problem is addressed as an 'e-mail' problem rather than an electronic recordkeeping problem." Hedstrom, who has been involved in several research projects dealing with electronic records, says that in her experience, "there are few, if any, software systems that conform to the standards for electronic recordkeeping which have been adopted or at least proposed." She continues by adding, "people are only willing to invest a small amount of effort in managing their records. If systems did this behind the screen, I believe that many of the . . . problems would go away."
This kind of 'behind the screen' approach is the focus of a great deal of work in the field of automatic text classification. Dr. William Cohen of AT&T Labs (1997) recently delivered a paper "Learning Rules that Classify E-mail" at the 1996 AAAI Spring Symposium on Machine Learning in Information Access. Cohen sees automatic text classification allowing intelligent routing of e-mail to heavily used accounts, adding structure to a user's unread mail, and providing filtering for novices and experts alike (Cohen). Developments in text classification can easily be extrapolated to some point in the future when a records management system could automatically identify an incoming e-mail message as a record and place it into the correct record series, all out of view of the users who just want to read their mail.
Perhaps the most radical proposition for dealing with e-mail comes from a group of researchers at Yale University. Their product, dubbed Lifestreams, rejects most of the core components of good records management including eliminating the idea of fixed records groups and retention schedules. Lifestreams stores every document a user creates or receives in a single timeline. The software's creators agree that such a system will require enormous resources, but they feel confident that the steep decline in the price of mass storage will continue (Steinberg, 206). While it may not be for everyone, the intriguing point of Lifestreams is that any document a user has ever touched is searchable and can be arranged in new categories simply and quickly.
Finally, we chose to examine the software market in an attempt to identify the current and forthcoming technical options for managing e-mail messages electronically. Our research involved surveying recent literature, contacting commercial software vendors, and contacting the Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA) Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC) at Fort Huachuca, Arizona. This agency is responsible for testing vendor products developed to meet the DoD-STD-5015.2. In the literature we looked primarily for surveys, reviews, or analyses of software products that perform document management and/or records management. We tried to identify installed software systems and gather analyses and criticisms from users. Our research did not include developers or vendors of such e-mail applications, e-mail clients or e-mail gateways, as these applications primarily address the functionality of e-mail as a communication device. They currently do not provide solutions for managing e-mail as records.
As with the literature survey, we focused our contacts on providers of document management and/or records management applications. Vendors were identified from sales brochures, the ARMA International home page on the world wide web, our literature survey, and information collected in the five other research areas. We contacted vendors and customers by both telephone and e-mail, in addition to reviewing vendor software when available.
The literature survey results were minimal. After a fairly extensive review, only three relevant software surveys were identified (Parker, 1997; Patel, Watson, and Fenner, 1997; Phillips and Tarrant, 1996). Forty-six of these software vendors were contacted. Nine vendors, described in Table 2, currently offer software applications that do have the functionality to manage e-mail [TABULAR DATA OMITTED] as records. Eighteen vendors stated that their products do not have such functionality. Nineteen vendors did not respond. Additionally, four vendor customers were contacted, with two responses. In addition, we learned that the JITC will not begin its RMA Certification Testing Program until September 1997 (Manago, 1997). Currently, no list of certified vendors exists.
The nine software vendors which do offer products that can handle email as records provide e-mail functionality in one of two ways: either by transferring the e-mail message from the e-mail system to a document management system that is integrated with a records management system; or by transferring the e-mail message from the e-mail system directly to a records management system.
In general, these systems are based on client/server distributed computing models and various database management systems (DBMS). The decision to save an email message as a record is normally made at the user level. E-mail messages and attachments are saved in their original format. Index terms, metadata, and records series are also assigned at the user level. The indexing task can be completely manual, or fully automated by templating, depending on customer preference. Once an e-mail record is created and saved to the filing system, it is handled like any other record within that filing system. It appears that the systems do not yet have a solution for capturing the content of a hot-link, especially if that link is external to the organization.
Document management and records management software vendors are currently providing the first-generation solutions to managing e-mail as records. Their solutions do not address all the unique problems of e-mail, nor do they address problems common to all electronic documents, such as filing complex documents comprised of numerous file types and hot-links, maintaining adequate hardware and software to access file contents over the long-term, and properly managing and destroying e-mail messages on server back-up tapes. In addition, software solutions cannot solve the fundamental problems common to the management of all records, namely good recordkeeping, education, awareness, compliance, and enforcement.
Many organizations fail to recognize e-mail as a potential source of records requiring formal records management. Among groups that do manage their e-mail, our survey identified four approaches to managing e-mail as a record: printing to paper, using the existing functionality in e-mail software to manage messages using folders and filters, transferring designated e-mail to a DMS, and capturing designated e-mail by a NMA. Each approach possesses a number of advantages and weaknesses, and an analysis of these practices reveals that no single approach currently solves all the problems associated with managing e-mail. Rather, combining characteristics of several of these approaches may allow one to capture e-mail records across an organization.
Printing to Paper
Printing the e-mail message to paper is by far the most common method of managing e-mail as a record. Most users feel comfortable with paper records, and many organizations have a paper-based records management function in place. Furthermore, the printed message can be integrated with related files to create a complete record of a particular transaction. Finally, printing to paper eliminates questions of technological obsolescence and proprietary issues. However, this approach creates two records environments, the electronic system in which the message was created and a hard copy environment within which. the message is managed as a record. Having two systems complicates the retention and disposition of the record especially if the organization lacks an effective records management program for paper records. Printing to paper also eliminates the "intelligence" of the electronic document, the searching and retrieval capabilities of an electronic system, as well as simultaneous multi-user access. Furthermore, metadata essential for determining the context of the message may be lost when printed, thus destroying the reliability and authenticity of the record. Printing to paper also exacerbates storage and filing costs for an organization and generally adds to the already paper-saturated office.
Despite the weaknesses of this approach, most organizations surveyed use the print-to-paper approach to manage their e-mail because of the convenience of the method, and because of the lack of alternative approaches. In some cases, this practice is further weakened by the lack of an official policy for determining when an e-mail message constitutes a record, leaving users to determine the nature and retention of the record without the knowledge, authority, or training to do so.
Managing E-Mail Records Within the E-mail System
No e-mail system currently addresses all the requirements for managing messages as records, although some organizations are using this approach to identify and capture relevant transactions. Using e-mail as a recordkeeping system has a few advantages. E-mail systems capture and preserve all relevant metadata related to the record. Furthermore, most systems are familiar to users and easy to learn. Some software also offers filtering functions to classify and file messages automatically, determine subject headings, and compose automatic responses. Mail can be sorted by various criteria such as sender, recipient, and date range, and placed into the appropriate folder. Nonetheless, these automated features fall far short of the needs of a robust records management system and do not eliminate the need for user education and intervention to index and manage records adequately. Several additional weaknesses exist. Managing messages as records within an e-mail system does not allow integration of e-mail with related records. This approach also creates individual filing structures, limiting both access to the records by other users and the consistency and control of RM functions. Most significantly, no adequate methods exist to apply retention requirements to records managed within an e-mail system. Deleting e-mail does not ensure destruction of the records, while, conversely, tape backups of messages are often mistaken for implementation of a records retention program.
Integration of E-Mail Messages into a DMS
Document management systems (DMS) offer sophisticated control of electronic records, allowing integration of e-mail messages within the total document environment of an organization. DMSs offer single point access to a variety of formats, thus preserving the functionality of compound documents. Some automated filing, a uniform identification system for all documents, version control, and the application of workflow software are additional advantages. Nevertheless, current document management systems alone fail to link records to retention requirements adequately, thus limiting their effectiveness in managing e-mail as an official record. In addition, DMSs do not usually incorporate the special needs of vital records or facilitate the final disposition of records.
Capturing E-mail Records within an RMA
Capturing e-mail within a records management application (RMA) offers a number of advantages over other approaches. Currently available RMAs are first-generation and as yet unproven for long-term records management requirements, but the products are extremely promising. An RMA captures the message from the e-mail system links it to appropriate retention schedules, allows series-level context of e-mail with other records, and integrates all records within an RMA regardless of media. Furthermore, RMAs document destruction of e-mail and ensure records security. Although attachments are handled by RMAs, they do not adequately handle the problem of hyperlinked documents.
At this time, no single approach adequately manages electronic mail as an official organizational record to ensure the authenticity, reliability, and retrievability of e-mail as evidence of a transaction. However, vendors are increasingly integrating characteristics of DMSs and RMAs, a promising combination of features which allows control over all documents within an organization while offering numerous points of capture and indexing. This approach also links the message to its retention requirements and related records.
1) Incorporate all e-mail records into your records management system.
Whether your organization uses e-mail to transmit information internally or externally, you need to include e-mail messages in your records management system alongside other electronic documents and paper-based records. Your policy needs to provide guidelines for acceptable use and explain access and privacy protection. It should define records and explain records management. Roles and responsibilities should be identified for end users, managers, technical staff, records managers, and support staff. Be aware that you do not need to create a policy from scratch. Numerous sources outline the components of a successful management strategy for e-mail. Richard Johnson (1997) states, ". . . electronic mail is, and will continue to be, one of the primary communications and storage vehicles for electronic records. It is critical that we understand the complexity of retention management and then design and implement its functions into our electronic mail environment."
2) Do not let your server manage you.
No matter what solution you use to manage or not to manage e-mail as records, you must manage your e-mail system back-up tapes. Do not mistake backup tapes for a retention policy. Make sure records are destroyed as scheduled.
3) Do not save every e-mail message.
Lifestreams, a software project mentioned earlier in this article, rests on the idea of permanently saving everything. Indeed, there are several reasons why this might prove valuable for some users. Who has not had the experience of desperately searching for a copy of some paper or letter written several months or years before? Modern search engines can routinely search several gigabytes of information in seconds, rendering enormous quantities of information manageable. For archivists, permanent retention of all electronic documents could provide an unparalleled record of the life of an individual or organization. In spite of the benefits, several good reasons remain to systematically destroy records that no longer have value to an organization. Prices for electronic storage continue to drop, but the space needed for files continues to rise. With the proliferation of multimedia technology we can only expect this trend to continue. If files are kept indefinitely, it compounds the problem of outdated file formats. As records managers, you will have to maintain software and hardware to read any number of outmoded or obscure files, or laboriously migrate them to new formats and media. From a systems administration perspective, eliminating records that have passed their retention period reduces the amount of storage space needed, makes backups of systems faster, and speeds recovery time when systems go down. For many, the most compelling argument against retaining files forever is the fear of litigation and discovery. Even an organization that is innocent of any wrongdoing could incur tremendous costs based on sheer volume alone if required to turn over all documents deemed relevant to a case.
4) Select your software with care and ensure its ability to handle complex documents.
If you plan to use a software solution to manage e-mail records, we recommend you consider how the system handles:
* identification of the message as a record
* the physical storage location of the e-mail message, as well as its associated attachments
* the electronic format in which the e-mail message is saved, as well as its associated attachments
* the way in which index terms are generated and metadata are saved
* the way in which an e-mail message is perpetually linked to its associated attachments
* the way in which hot-links, especially from outside the organization, are saved and linked to e-mail messages
* the way in which e-mail records are integrated with all other records in the filing system
* the way in which retention is assigned
* the way in which destruction is recorded
* the way in which authenticity is preserved.
Currently, records management practitioners have limited information available regarding the performance of installed systems. We anticipate, however, that within 6 months to one year many organizations will be using software solutions combining DMS and RMA features to manage e-mail messages as records. We recommend contacting vendors for client referrals and thoroughly investigating the results produced by the selected software solutions. As they become increasingly common, these technologies should become more refined and robust solutions for managing e-mail.
Although an infant technology, automatic text classification bears watching. Some of the new e-mail readers are beginning to incorporate early versions of this technology (Kramer 6-7). These readers also give users a rudimentary capacity to sort mail before they see it, allowing mail to be processed by sender, recipient, and date. Although currently far short of the needs of records managers, these features foreshadow more advances to come.
5) Seize the opportunity.
View e-mail records management as an opportunity rather than a problem. The process of integrating e-mail into your organization's records management program provides ample opportunity to update existing policies and procedures. The questions records managers need to ask to develop appropriate systems and retention schedules apply equally to paper and electronic documents. Failure to deal adequately with the problem of e-mail now will result in a future of misspent resources, crippling legal expenditures, and inefficient access to inaccurate information. Integrating e-mail records is a "golden opportunity to bring important records management issues to the attention of the [organization's] management and to raise the visibility and status of the records program (ARMA Draft 1997)."
The basis of any effective approach to managing e-mail communication is a coherent, consistent records management policy that mandates what employees are to do with electronic records such as email messages. Satisfactory procedures to implement records management policy with e-mail have been slow to develop. In 1997, state-of-the-art solutions for managing email messages across the entire organization are still paper-intensive, cumbersome and/or time-consuming. The most promising alternatives use document management systems with records management functionality (such as Squire's integration of Lava Systems with BYTEQUEST) or records management applications with document management functionality (such as ForeMost by Provenance). What organizations still need is a system that uses artificial intelligence to identify automatically an incoming or outgoing e-mail message as a record and classify it in the correct record series for retention and other recordkeeping purposes. Professional associations need to take the lead in developing and promulgating standard policies and procedures and in working with software vendors to implement the necessary technological solutions for identifying, capturing, and managing e-mail records.
The source of the definitions for terms is provided in brackets; web addresses for sources are provided in parentheses.
Attachment A document (such as a word processing document, a sound file, or a hot-link) that is associated with another document (usually an electronic mail message) by being appended to or embedded in and transmitted with it. In this paper, we consider the attached document to be an integral part of an e-mail message, rather than a separate entity, so that both documents form the record. We have also used the term "compound document" to describe electronic messages containing attachments.
Authenticity A record is authentic when it is the document it claims to be [Duranti, 1995]. Authenticity implies that the record has not been altered or manipulated in any way.
Convenience Record Extra copies of records maintained for ease of access and reference. They are not usually considered to be an official organizational record and are not scheduled in corporate record retention schedules [ARMA, 1985].
Data Migration The periodic transfer of data from one hardware or software configuration to another, or from one generation of computer technology to a subsequent generation. Migration is a necessary action for retaining the integrity of the data and for allowing users to search, retrieve, and make use of data in the face of constantly changing technology.
Database Management System A software system used to access and retrieve data stored in a database [NARA's Managing Electronic Records Instructional Guide].
Document Information contained in a particular medium, generated in the normal course of business operations. Most records are documents but not all documents are records. The distinction between a record and a document is not altogether clear. We suggest that documents may contain information created in a business context, but do not necessarily represent evidence of business activities. Documents can serve as envelopes which point to other types of documents.
Document Management System (DMS) Software that indexes and profiles documents based on content; controls documents using such functions as check in/check out, version control, audit trails, and security of information; and facilitates searching by profile values or by some other hierarchical structure such as folders and files. DMS creates structure and access methods for electronic documents and provides a database of documents that can be searched and retrieved. A DMS does not directly address retention management and disposition, rather, it manages versions of documents currently being worked on. A DMS should be used in conjunction with a records management application (RMA).
Electronic Mail Message We have adopted the Department of Defense's definition of an e-mail message for the purposes of this paper: A document created or received on an electronic mail system including brief notes, more formal or substantive narrative documents, and any attachments which may be transmitted with the message [DoD 3.2.41]. (http://www.dtic.dla.mil:80/c3i/stdfb. html#DETAILED) We also include the associated metadata or header information to be a vital part of the message.
Hot-link A hypertext link that is embedded in an e-mail message, which allows the user to go directly from the e-mail application to a website. Essentially, it links together two different documents. This capability exists only in some electronic mail systems.
Metadata Data describing stored data, that is, describing the structure, data elements, interrelationships and other characteristics of electronic information [DoD 3.2.55]. The DoD uses the terms "record profile data" and "metadata" interchangeably, which we have also adopted in this paper. We have used the term metadata to refer to transmission and receipt information, such as sender, addressee, cc, path, subject, date, and time. We assume that metadata is the information entered into a document management system to describe or profile a message, and that it provides descriptive indexing terms used for searching and retrieval of messages stored in a database. Metadata is not index terms drawn from a controlled vocabulary. For more information see (http://www.lis.pitt.edu/~nhprc/meta 96.html) and (http://purl.org/meta data/dublin_core_elements).
Non-Record Materials that lack evidence of an organization's business activities or lack information of lasting value to the company. Nonrecord e-mail might include announcement of a staff party or purely private transactions, for example. What distinguishes an e-mail record from a non-record is the determination of the value of its content to the organization.
Official Record A record which is legally recognized as establishing some fact or as evidence of a business transaction [ARMA, 1985].
Record Documentary materials or information, regardless of physical media or characteristics, made or received by an office in connection with the transaction of official business and preserved by that office as evidence of the organization's functions, policies, decisions, procedures, operations, or other activities of that office or because of the value of data in the record [NARA Records Management Handbook]. (http://www. dtic.dla.mil: 80/c3i/stdfb.html# DETAILED). The value of a record depends upon its reliability and authenticity. To be maintained as records, the content, structure, and context of an e-mail message must be preserved.
Records Management A discipline that provides life cycle management of all records from their creation or receipt through their processing, distribution, organization, and retrieval to their ultimate disposition.
Records Management Application (RMA) DoD and NARA use this term to describe the actual software used by an organization to manage its records. Its primary management functions are to categorize, locate, and identify records due for disposition, as well as store, retrieve, and document the disposition of the electronic records stored within its repository [DoD 3.2.74].
Record Profile The DoD uses this term interchangeably with metadata. A profile is information about a record that is used by the RMA to file, search, and retrieve the record. Information fields such as date. subject, to, from, record number, version number, and originating organization can serve as indexing terms [DoD 3.2.76].
Record Series A group of related records that are used and arranged in accordance with a filing system. These records are normally kept together because they relate to a particular subject or function, result from the same activity, have a particular form, or have some relationship arising from their creation, receipt, use, or disposition. They can be evaluated as a unit for retention scheduling purposes [DoD 3.2.78].
Reliability Refers to the authority and trustworthiness of records as evidence. Reliable records can be trusted due to their form, their completeness, the degree of control exercised on their creation, and their author's reliability [Duranti, 1995].
Workflow The electronic analog of how paperwork moves through the work environment. Richard Johnson describes workflow as "document transport." Workflow requires a networked environment which supports electronic routing of work from one user to the next, and links documents to the underlying business process. E-mail facilitates workflow because it allows better dissemination of information and has no physical boundaries; workflow can bring discrete databases together and preserve the accessibility of the information to each user. Workflow makes possible collaborative workgroup computing [Koulopoulos and Frappaolo, 1995].
REFERENCES & RESOURCES
Anderson, James and Linda Mercer. EMail interview. 9 August 1997.
ARMA International. "ARMA E-mail Guideline Development Task Force."
Arnason, Charles, Telephone interview. 29 July 1997.
Archives. "Managing Electronic Messages as Records." Arnason, Charles. Telephone interview. 29 July 1997. Archives of New Zealand. "Electronic Records Policy." Australian Archives. "Managing Electronic Messages as Records." Balough, Ann, "Managing E-mail," The Records and Retrieval Report 12 (December 1996). Barata, Kimberly. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Barry Associates. Barry, Richard. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Bearman, David. E-mail interview. 1 August 1997. Bearman, David. 1996. "Electronic Evidence: Strategies for Managing Records in Contemporary Organizations," Section II Policy Guidelines, Chapter 4: The Implications of Armstrong v. the Executive Office of the President for the Archival Management of Electronic Records: 118-144. Cohen, William, Personal interview. 29 July 1997. Cole, Brian. E-mail interview. 1 August 1997. Dirks, Lee. Telephone interview. 29 July 1997. Doyle, Larry. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. Durante, Luciana. "Reliability and Authenticity; The Concepts and their Implications." Archivaria 39 (1995): 5-10. "Electronic and Voice Mail 1.0: A Management Guide for Maine State Government." E-mail/Groupware. 1996. Lan Times 13, no. 21 (September 23): 113-124. Erickson, Brad, and Ken Ward, telephone interview. 1 August 1997. Evans, Bruce F. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Forrester Research, Inc. The E-mail Explosion. Forrester Research, Inc., 1997. News Release. Gervais, Denis, E-mail interview. 1 August 1997. Galahad Information Systems. Hagberg, Karen L., and A. Max Olson. "Shadow Data, E-mail Play a Key Role in Discovery, Trial." New York Law Journal (1997). Hedstrom, Margaret. Telephone interview. 30 July 1997. Hession, Paul. Telephone interview. 25 July 1997. Information Management Standards and Practices Division, National Archives of Canada. "Records/Documents/Information Management (RDIM): Integrated Document Management System for the Government of Canada." Request for Proposal: Software Requirements. (May 1996). Ivins, October. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. Jessen, John H., and Kenneth R. Shear. "The Impact of Electronic Data Discovery on the Corporation. Electronic Evidence Discovery Inc." Esquire Johnson, Richard. E-mail interview. 6 August 1997. Johnson, Tom. E-mail interview. 4 August 1997. Kofsky, Elizabeth. E-mail interview. i August 1997a. Kofsky, Elizabeth. Telephone interview. 1 August 1997b. Koulopoulos, Thomas M., and Carl Frappaolo. 1995 Electronic Document Management Systems: A Portable Consultant. New York. Kramer, Dave, "E-Mail Showdown," Internet Voyager, April 1997, Volume 3, Issue 4. LaserFiche Document Imaging. Lambert, Francis. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Managing Records in E-Mail Systems. 1995. State Government Records Management Information Series, State. Manage, William. Telephone interview. 18 July 1997. Marriage of Convenience: Integrating Messaging Solutions. 1997. Info World 19, no. 10 (March 10): 72-79. McDonald, John. E-mail interview. 26 July 1997. Miers, Derek. E-mail interview. 5 August 1997. Miller, Harris N. E-mail interview. 29 July 1997. Moore, Geoff. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. Murphy, Jan. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. The National Archives and Record Administration. August 28, 19953 Electronic Mail Systems, Final Rule. The Federal Register. National Archives of Canada. "Electronic Records Management Initiatives in the Government of Canada - A Directory." Information Management Standards and Practices Division. (May 1996). New York State Archives and Records Administration. "Managing Records in E-Mail Systems." (1995): 39 pp. Parker, Elizabeth. 1997. UK Records Management Software Survey, Records Management Society of Great Britain, issue 3 (February). Patel, Jeetu, James K. Watson, and Joe Fenner. 1997. Doculabs looks at document management: a benchmark study of which products offer a good fit for your application. Inform 11 (January): 20-22. Phillips, John T., and Paul M. Tarrant. 1996. Software Directory for Automated Records Management Systems, ARMA. Pittsburgh Project, The. "Functional Requirements for Evidence in Recordkeeping." Pollard, Stephen, E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. Reardon, Sarah. E-mail interview. 7 August 1997. Rosenberg, Geanne. March 31, 1997. Electronic Discovery Proves Effective Legal Weapon. New York Times Cybertimes. Rossman, Kenneth F. E-mail interview. 29-30 July 1997. Ruller, Tom. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Select Technologies, Inc. (30 July 1997) Smith, Richard. Telephone interview. 1 August 1997. Snyder, Beryl. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. Standards Australia. Australian Standard 4390, Records Management. Homebush, New South Wales: Standards Australia, 1996. Steinberg, Steven J., "Lifestreams," Wired Magazine, February 1997, Volume 5, Issue 2. Society of American Archivists. Tyler, Judy. Telephone interview. 31 July 1997. Uniform Law Conference of Canada. March 1997. Uniform Electronic Evidence Act - Consultation Paper. United States District Court for the District of Columbia. C.A. No. 96-2840 PLF Public Citizen Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, v. John Carlin, in his official capacity as Archivist of the United States, et al., Defendants. Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgement and in Support of Plaintiffs' Cross-motion for Summary Judgement. 11 June 1997. United States Department of Defense. (Draft) DoD Standard 5105.2, Design Criteria Standard for Records Management Application Functional Baseline Requirements. 8 April 1997. Wallace, Roderick. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Wayman, Tom. E-mail interview. 4 August 1997. Wolfe, Marc. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997. Zane, Del. Telephone interview. 30 July 1997. ADDITIONAL RESOURCES Archives and Museum Informatics Site. ARMA International E-mail Guideline Development Task Force. Environmental Protection Agency. International Council on Archives. New York State Archives and Records Administration. "Managing Records in E-Mail Systems." Sutton, Michael. Document Management for the Enterprise: Principles, Techniques and Applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1996. Zaben, Alan S. "Managing Electronic Records, Including E-mail." ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The University of Texas at Austin Graduate School of Library and Information Science Course: "Managing Electronic Records" Students: Nancy E. Enneking Jane S. Fleming Aimee D. Green S. Robbin Griffin Stanley T. Gunn, Jr. James S. Lloyd Wendy E. Lyon Margaret A. McGhee Erin N. Rhodes Teaching Assistant: Gary L. Murray, Jr. Professor: Susan L. Cisco, Ph.D., CRM AUTHOR: Nancy Enneking was raised in Portland, Oregon, and attended Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington, where she obtained a BA with Honors in History in 1990 and was co-winner of the Sires-Whittier Award for the Outstanding History Major. In addition to her study of History, her and one other student's program of course work in Classics formed the basis for the school's later adoption of a minor degree in that field. Her other areas of academic interest included geology, anthropology, and astronomy. During the summer of 1989 she took part in her first archaeological expedition with a group from U.C. Berkeley at Tel Dor, Israel. In 1990 Ms. Enneking began a graduate program in Egyptology at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD, receiving her MA in 1993 and completing her doctoral exams in 1995. Her minor field was Akkadian. During her time at Hopkins she received fellowships for each year of study, served as a Teaching Assistant for several classes, and made four trips to Egypt as a member of the JHU expedition to Thebes, Luxor, Egypt to record and excavate Theban Tomb #96 with her advisor Dr. Betsy Bryan. In 1995 Ms. Enneking took a student job in Special Collections and Archives at Hopkins MSE Library, working as an Archival Assistant. Due to increasing frustration with the course of her dissertation and the academic job market, she chose to take time away from Hopkins and elected to obtain a M.L.S. with a focus on Archives. Ms. Enneking is currently a graduate student in the Graduate School of Library and Info. Science at UT Austin in Austin, TX.
Arnason, Charles. Telephone interview. 29 July 1997.
Archives of New Zealand. "Electronic Records Policy."
Australian Archives. "Managing Electronic Messages as Records."
Balough, Ann, "Managing E-mail," The Records and Retrieval Report 12 (December 1996).
Barata, Kimberly. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Barry, Richard. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Bearman, David. E-mail interview. 1 August 1997.
Bearman, David. 1996. "Electronic Evidence: Strategies for Managing Records in Contemporary Organizations," Section II Policy Guidelines, Chapter 4: The Implications of Armstrong v. the Executive Office of the President for the Archival Management of Electronic Records: 118-144.
Cohen, William, Personal interview. 29 July 1997.
Cole, Brian. E-mail interview. 1 August 1997.
Dirks, Lee. Telephone interview. 29 July 1997.
Doyle, Larry. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997.
Durante, Luciana. "Reliability and Authenticity; The Concepts and their Implications." Archivaria 39 (1995): 5-10.
"Electronic and Voice Mail 1.0: A Management Guide for Maine State Government."
E-mail/Groupware. 1996. Lan Times 13, no. 21 (September 23): 113-124.
Erickson, Brad, and Ken Ward, telephone interview. 1 August 1997.
Evans, Bruce F. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Forrester Research, Inc. The E-mail Explosion. Forrester Research, Inc., 1997. News Release.
Gervais, Denis, E-mail interview. 1 August 1997.
Galahad Information Systems.
Hagberg, Karen L., and A. Max Olson. "Shadow Data, E-mail Play a Key Role in Discovery, Trial." New York Law Journal (1997).
Hedstrom, Margaret. Telephone interview. 30 July 1997.
Hession, Paul. Telephone interview. 25 July 1997.
Information Management Standards and Practices Division, National Archives of Canada. "Records/Documents/Information Management (RDIM): Integrated Document Management System for the Government of Canada." Request for Proposal: Software Requirements. (May 1996).
Ivins, October. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997.
Jessen, John H., and Kenneth R. Shear. "The Impact of Electronic Data Discovery on the Corporation. Electronic Evidence Discovery Inc." Esquire
Johnson, Richard. E-mail interview. 6 August 1997.
Johnson, Tom. E-mail interview. 4 August 1997.
Kofsky, Elizabeth. E-mail interview. i August 1997a.
Kofsky, Elizabeth. Telephone interview. 1 August 1997b.
Koulopoulos, Thomas M., and Carl Frappaolo. 1995 Electronic Document Management Systems: A Portable Consultant. New York.
Kramer, Dave, "E-Mail Showdown," Internet Voyager, April 1997, Volume 3, Issue 4.
LaserFiche Document Imaging.
Lambert, Francis. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Managing Records in E-Mail Systems. 1995. State Government Records Management Information Series, State.
Manage, William. Telephone interview. 18 July 1997.
Marriage of Convenience: Integrating Messaging Solutions. 1997. Info World 19, no. 10 (March 10): 72-79.
McDonald, John. E-mail interview. 26 July 1997.
Miers, Derek. E-mail interview. 5 August 1997.
Miller, Harris N. E-mail interview. 29 July 1997.
Moore, Geoff. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997.
Murphy, Jan. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997. The National Archives and Record Administration. August 28, 19953 Electronic Mail Systems, Final Rule. The Federal Register.
National Archives of Canada. "Electronic Records Management Initiatives in the Government of Canada - A Directory." Information Management Standards and Practices Division. (May 1996).
New York State Archives and Records Administration. "Managing Records in E-Mail Systems." (1995): 39 pp.
Parker, Elizabeth. 1997. UK Records Management Software Survey, Records Management Society of Great Britain, issue 3 (February).
Patel, Jeetu, James K. Watson, and Joe Fenner. 1997. Doculabs looks at document management: a benchmark study of which products offer a good fit for your application. Inform 11 (January): 20-22.
Phillips, John T., and Paul M. Tarrant. 1996. Software Directory for Automated Records Management Systems, ARMA.
Pittsburgh Project, The. "Functional Requirements for Evidence in Recordkeeping."
Pollard, Stephen, E-mail interview. 31 July 1997.
Reardon, Sarah. E-mail interview. 7 August 1997.
Rosenberg, Geanne. March 31, 1997. Electronic Discovery Proves Effective Legal Weapon. New York Times Cybertimes.
Rossman, Kenneth F. E-mail interview. 29-30 July 1997.
Ruller, Tom. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Select Technologies, Inc. (30 July 1997)
Smith, Richard. Telephone interview. 1 August 1997.
Snyder, Beryl. E-mail interview. 31 July 1997.
Standards Australia. Australian Standard 4390, Records Management. Homebush, New South Wales: Standards Australia, 1996.
Steinberg, Steven J., "Lifestreams," Wired Magazine, February 1997, Volume 5, Issue 2.
Society of American Archivists.
Tyler, Judy. Telephone interview. 31 July 1997.
Uniform Law Conference of Canada. March 1997. Uniform Electronic Evidence Act - Consultation Paper.
United States District Court for the District of Columbia. C.A. No. 96-2840 PLF Public Citizen Inc., et al., Plaintiffs, v. John Carlin, in his official capacity as Archivist of the United States, et al., Defendants. Memorandum in Opposition to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, for Summary Judgement and in Support of Plaintiffs' Cross-motion for Summary Judgement. 11 June 1997.
United States Department of Defense. (Draft) DoD Standard 5105.2, Design Criteria Standard for Records Management Application Functional Baseline Requirements. 8 April 1997.
Wallace, Roderick. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Wayman, Tom. E-mail interview. 4 August 1997.
Wolfe, Marc. E-mail interview. 28 July 1997.
Zane, Del. Telephone interview. 30 July 1997.
Archives and Museum Informatics Site.
ARMA International E-mail Guideline Development Task Force.
Environmental Protection Agency.
International Council on Archives.
New York State Archives and Records Administration. "Managing Records in E-Mail Systems."
Sutton, Michael. Document Management for the Enterprise: Principles, Techniques and Applications. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1996.
Zaben, Alan S. "Managing Electronic Records, Including E-mail."
The University of Texas at Austin Graduate School of Library and Information Science
Course: "Managing Electronic Records"
Nancy E. Enneking Jane S. Fleming Aimee D. Green S. Robbin Griffin Stanley T. Gunn, Jr. James S. Lloyd Wendy E. Lyon Margaret A. McGhee Erin N. Rhodes
Gary L. Murray, Jr.
Susan L. Cisco, Ph.D., CRM
AUTHOR: Nancy Enneking was raised in Portland, Oregon, and attended Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington, where she obtained a BA with Honors in History in 1990 and was co-winner of the Sires-Whittier Award for the Outstanding History Major. In addition to her study of History, her and one other student's program of course work in Classics formed the basis for the school's later adoption of a minor degree in that field. Her other areas of academic interest included geology, anthropology, and astronomy. During the summer of 1989 she took part in her first archaeological expedition with a group from U.C. Berkeley at Tel Dor, Israel.
In 1990 Ms. Enneking began a graduate program in Egyptology at the Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore, MD, receiving her MA in 1993 and completing her doctoral exams in 1995. Her minor field was Akkadian. During her time at Hopkins she received fellowships for each year of study, served as a Teaching Assistant for several classes, and made four trips to Egypt as a member of the JHU expedition to Thebes, Luxor, Egypt to record and excavate Theban Tomb #96 with her advisor Dr. Betsy Bryan. In 1995 Ms. Enneking took a student job in Special Collections and Archives at Hopkins MSE Library, working as an Archival Assistant. Due to increasing frustration with the course of her dissertation and the academic job market, she chose to take time away from Hopkins and elected to obtain a M.L.S. with a focus on Archives. Ms. Enneking is currently a graduate student in the Graduate School of Library and Info. Science at UT Austin in Austin, TX.…