geert-jan van bussel the theoretical framework for the 'archive-as-is'.
an organization oriented view on archives - part i
(especially societal) contexts within the dimensions of the theory that help to
understand the meaning of their narrative in spacetime. It is used as a declarative
model for the 'contextual narrative' of archives. Its philosophical foundation is
weak, its comprehensibility problematic and its implementation in organizational
practices debatable.
Digital Diplomatics, characterized by more empiricist, traditional, proven, and
revitalized diplomatic techniques, methods, and concepts, is, in contrast, almost
solely about the records and archives themselves and the relationships between
them. It concentrates on the continuing identity and integrity of records to reveal
documentary form, the attributes that characterize records and reveal its legal,
administrative, provenancial, procedural, technological, and documentary
functional context. It produces detailed definitions of authenticity and integrity
that allow ICTs to recognize and realize 'trusted' records using its Chain of
Preservation. The theoretical framework of Digital Diplomatics can be used as a
declarative model for the (technical) generation of records, the relations between
them, and their integrity and authenticity. It seems to be partly based on an
unproven hypothesis and it faces a contextual crisis because the context it captures
is not enough to understand the wider social, cultural, and (inter-) organizational
environment that generated the archive.
The focus of both theories lays on the cultural (or historical) value (Records
Continuum theory) and the evidential value (Digital Diplomatics) of archives. Both
are important values that can be used to improve the way records and archives are
managed and used within organizations. They offer interesting insights for EIM.
The Records Continuum theory emphasizes the importance of context for a
'reconstruction of the past', extremely important for realizing accountability,
governance, and compliance (Van Bussel, 2012b, 2016). Digital Diplomatics offers
tools and frameworks to improve the authenticity and integrity of records to allow
them to be used as evidence. Both theories offer, their theoretical weaknesses
notwithstanding, convincing arguments for the value of archives and records for
organizations. But they have not succeeded in linking these values to the challenges
of reaching organizational objectives, designing business strategies, and
constructing archives in a way that offers EIM the possibility to do so effectively.
Both theories do not explain how and why the archive is as it is.
To emphasize the organizational value of archives, there is, I think, enough space for
another theoretical view: an organizational one, the view of the 'Archive-as-Is', a
pragmatic view on archives and records, their genesis, construction, use, and
continuous management in the everyday life of people and organizations. A view
that can be used as a declarative model for understanding the archive 'as-it-is', how
it has been designed, constructed, processed, manipulated, and managed as a
valuable business resource within EIM. A view that explains how it has 'grown' to
be the archive that the organization or the person that generated it, wants it to be,
with all distortions consciously and unconsciously embedded within it.
Archives are constructed in organizational settings and are the result of
organizational behaviour, business processes, and predetermined rules and
regulations. Cultural and social preconceptions, deviant behaviour, and (conscious
or unconscious) negligence are influencing decision making within organizations
and affect EIM in its management of records and archives. Researching the genesis
of organizational (or personal) archives, the records within them, and their
fundamental components is necessary to understand them, to contextualize them,
and to use them for reaching organizational objectives, the design of business
strategies, and the increase of business value. That is what they were primarily made
for....
archives in liquid times
34
Literature
Afshar, M., Ahmad, K. (2015). A new hybrid model for electronic records management.
Journal of Theoretical and Applied Information Technology, SI (3), 489-495.
Alalwan, J.A., Weistroffer, H.R. (2012). Enterprise content management research:
a comprehensive review. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 25(5), 441-461.
Baets, W. (1992). Aligning information systems with business strategy. The Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, 1(4), 205-213.
Bearman, D. (1993a). Record Keeping Systems. Archivaria, 36, 16-36.
Bearman, D. (1993b). Functional requirements for record keeping systems. Archives
Museum Informatics, 7(2), 3-5.
Bearman, D. (1994). Strategies for Managing Records in Contemporary Organizations.
Pittsburgh: Archives Museum Informatics.
Bearman, D., Duff, W. (1996). Grounding archival description in the functional
requirements for evidence. Archivaria, 41, 275-303.
Bearman, D., Lytle, R. (1985). The Power of the Principle of Provenance. Archivaria, 21 (1),
14-27.
Benbasat, I., Goldstein, D.K., Mead, M. (1987). The Case Research Strategy in Studies of
Information Systems. MIS Quarterly, 11 (3), 369-386.
Booms, H. (1987). Society and the formation of a documentary heritage. Issues in the
Appraisal of Archival Sources. Archivaria, 24, 69-107.
Boyle, L. (1976). Diplomatics. In J.M. Powell (Ed.), Medieval Studies. An Introduction
(pp. 69-101). Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
Brothman, B. (1999). Declining Derrida. Integrity, tensegrity and the preservation of archives
from deconstruction. Archivaria, 4S, 64-88.
Brothman, B. (2001). The past that archives keep. Memory, history, and the preservation of
archival records. Archivaria, 51, 41-80.
Brown, R. (1995). Macro-Appraisal Theory and the Context of the Public Records Creator.
Archivaria, 40, 40-74.
Brown, R. (1997). Death of a Renaissance Record-Keeper: The Murder of Tomasso da Tortona
in Ferrara 1385. Archivaria, 44, 1-43.
Burton, A. (ed.) (2005). Archive stories. Facts, fictions and the writing ofhistory. Durham,
NC: Duke University Press.
Campt, T. (2012). Image matters. Archive, photography, and the African diaspora in Europe.
Durham: Duke University Press.
Carucci, P. (1992). Archival science today. Principles, methods and results. In O. Bucci (ed.),
Archival science on the threshold of the Year 2000: Proceedings of the international conference,
Macerata, 3-S September, 1990 (pp. 55-68). Ancona: University of Macerata.
Chaki, S. (2015). Enterprise Information Management in Practice. New York: Apress.
Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Subaltern studies and postcolonial historiography. Nepantla:
Views from the South 1(1), 9-32.
35
