Purpose -All organisations may not have the same motivations for investing in records management. For some organisations the benefits of records management are more important than for others. It can be hypothesised that an organisation with a "natural" motivation for records management controls records processes more thoroughly than an organisation without a similar motivation. However, it is not understood how organisational context affects records management. In this paper the aim is to examine what motivations there are for an organisation to invest in records management especially in a mobile working environment. Design/methodology/approach -Aspects explored were ISO standards, and record users in three different organisations. The empirical data were gathered by interviews with 25 respondents and qualitative analysis of the ISO 15489 standard content. Results from the interviews were compared with the ISO standard. For this purpose, quantitative analysis was used to identify and categorise motivations given in the standard. Findings -Respondents highlighted information-based and work-process related ISO motivations. In general, internal motivations were emphasised and cultural-societal goals were practically not mentioned at all. For mobile users records management is a tool to manage information and support their own and colleagues' work processes. The organisation's function affects the nature of the records produced, and this has an impact on users' attitude towards and knowledge of records management. Originality/value -Analysis of motivations in the ISO 15489-1 standard gives a new perspective to organisational records management. The motivations complement the picture given by studies of records usage in organisations.

PurposeThis paper seeks to examine how an electronic records management system has been used in a Finnish government agency. In particular, it aims to study the relationship between functional classification scheme and the way users in different organisational units and at different organisational levels have employed the system. The goal is to examine whether electronic records management systems were easier to use if the system “knew” what functional classes the user (or other employees in the user's organisational unit) typically need in their work.Design/methodology/approachThe study is based on two sources. The first source is metadata in records that were captured in the electronic records management system of the agency. It reflects actual behaviour of users when they interact with the system and classification of records. The second source is distribution of functions to organisational units in the light of policy documents and a survey made in the organisation. The study compares the two sources to see how the users have employed the electronic records management system in their work and how this relates to organisational structure and supposed usage of the system.FindingsIn general, individual employees employ only a small part of the classification. However, this does not apply at a higher level in the organisational hierarchy: the higher the person's position in the hierarchy, the more classes he/she is likely to use in the work. Regardless of the position, the classes are generally those identified as belonging to the employee's unit.Research limitations/implicationsThe study is based on one agency with a functional organisational structure. The findings may not apply to organisations where job descriptions are fluid. They should also be tested in more complex organisational settings. One could develop new methods of automated classification which combine analysis of document content with contextual reasoning about the likely functional classes.Practical implicationsAccess to electronic records management systems could be facilitated by creating in systems user/unit profiles defining what functional classes the user is most likely to need in their work. It would also be useful if systems simply remembered what functional classes the user has needed in the past.Originality/valueThe study offers insight into how an electronic records management system is used in an organisation. This is valuable for companies developing records management software and persons trying to gain a deeper understanding of records management in organisations.

Purpose -The article compares MoReq and Finnish SÄ HKE specifications to see their differences and similarities. Both MoReq and SÄ HKE set requirements to functionality and metadata of ERM systems and define a XML-scheme for exporting records from the systems. Thus, both specifications are quite similar in some sense. This article seeks to find out whether there is an easy way for harmonizing both. Design/methodology/approach -The study is based on textual sources. Findings -MoReq and SÄ HKE are quite incompatible when one looks at data models, elements and functional requirements. There are also some similarities, but no clear path from one specification to another. Practical implications -There is no easy way for turning a SÄ HKE-approved system into MoReq certified system (or vice versa). Harmonizing SÄ HKE with MoReq would require major revisions in SÄ HKE and also a policy change in Finland. Originality/value -Because the SÄ HKE specification is available only in Finnish, its content is largely unknown outside the country. There are no similar studies.

People feel that their privacy is violated when information about them is passed inappropriately from one context or social sphere to another. This makes records and archives management a focal point of privacy issu es, because its goal is to transfer information from one context, place, and point in time to other contexts, places, and points in time. Society has a number of mechanisms ("strategies") for protecting the privacy of people. The article examines five of them (purpose limitation, privacy self-management and right to be forgotten, destruction, anonymization, and information sa fe haven approach) and the limits they set to the contextual transfer of information. If the strategies are implemented in society without regard to archival needs, archives have difficulties in fulfilling their functions in society. Therefore, records professionals should make their point of view known when privacy issues are discussed. Records professionals also should be aware of the mutability of the category of personally identifiable information and the changing nature of privacy issu es in the digital environment. Changing form of privacy issues Article 12 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states "No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honor and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks." (United Nations 1948)

No abstract