The assessment of the appraisal of records: case of the University of the Witwatersrand and the University of Venda

Abstract

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to investigate the state of appraisal with regard to compliance with archives and records management legislations (ARML), the archives and records management policy (ARMP), reappraisal of records, capacity building, archives building and electronic records management (ERM) and to make a recommendation based on the research findings.Design/methodology/approachThis study was based on the qualitative research technique. The research approach was a multiple case study comparing the previously advantaged and disadvantaged universities in South Africa.FindingsThe study found that ARML, ARMP, reappraisal of records and capacity building are essential for the appraisal of university records. The lack of appropriate appraisal theory/strategy led to a loss of institutional memory.Research limitations/implicationsThis research was limited to the University of the Witwatersrand (WITS) and the University of Venda (UNIVEN). These two institutions are representatives of the state of archiving in South Africa.Practical implicationsThis research will serve a benchmark for other South African universities, intending to implement systematic disposal of records in compliance with legislations and policies.Social implicationsFailure by universities to appraise records will lead to the loss of institutional memory. This implies that history of institution will be lost if necessary measures are not taken.Originality/valueThere is very little, if any, research on the appraisal of South African universities’ records. The outcome of this research will benefit universities that are seeking to develop and implement appraisal strategies.

The state of digital records preservation in South Africa’s public sector in the 21st century: a literature review

“…South Africa’s public sector institutions generate public records that need to be managed in compliance with the country’s legislative and regulatory instruments (Katuu and Ngoepe, 2015, p. 135). Netshakhuma (2020, p. 3) notes that in South Africa, there are two tiers of public archival authorities: provincial and local/municipal archival structures. NARS was established by promulgation of the National Archives and Records Service of South Africa Act 43 of 1996 (Republic of South Africa, 1996, or NARSSA).…”

“…NARS controls national departments and each province now has its own provincial archives and related legislation. NARS has authority over provincial and local municipal archival structures, and many provincial departments still follow NARSSA guidelines (Netshakhuma, 2020, p. 3). Mokwevho and Jacobs (2012, p. 38) pointed out that the NARS published guidelines in 2000 regarding electronic records management as part of an integrated management system for documents and records.…”

“…For instance, even though there was a reorganization of some departments, it was still essential for all the provincial government departments and municipalities to be managed in terms of the 1996 Act, which states that the National Archivist “shall be charged with the proper management and care of public records in the custody of government bodies” [National Archives and Records Service of South Africa (NARSSA), 2006, p. 5]. For that task to be accomplished, “each department should designate or appoint a records manager” (Netshakhuma, 2020, p. 3). In practice, many provincial departments work to the requirements of the national act (Ngoepe and Nkwe, 2018).…”