The post‐custodial/pro‐custodial argument from a records management perspective

Tough, Alistair

doi:10.1080/0037981042000199115

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Tough, A.G. (2004), “The post‐custodial/pro‐custodial argument from a records management perspective”, Journal of the Society of Archivists , Vol. 25 No.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

We are archivists, but are we OK?

Currall

Moss

2008

Records Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to show that the digital environment of the early twenty‐first century is forcing the information sciences to revisit practices and precepts built around paper and physical objects over centuries. The training of archivists, records managers, librarians and museum curators has had to accommodate this new reality. Often the response has been to superimpose a digital overlay on existing curricula. A few have taken a radical approach by scrutinising the fundamentals of the professions and the ontologies of the materials they handle.Design/methodology/approachThe article explores a wide range of the issues exposed by this critique through critical analysis of ideas and published literature.FindingsThe authors challenge archive and records management educators to align their curricula with contemporary need and to recognise that partnership with other professionals, particularly in the area of technology, is essential.Practical implicationsThe present generation owe it to future generations of archivists and records managers to ensure that the education that they get to prepare them for professional life is forward‐looking in the same way.Originality/valueThis paper aims to raise awareness of the educational needs of twenty‐first century archives and records professionals.

show abstract

“…Tough, A.G. (2004), “The post‐custodial/pro‐custodial argument from a records management perspective”, Journal of the Society of Archivists , Vol. 25 No.…”

Section: Notesmentioning

confidence: 99%

We are archivists, but are we OK?

Currall

Moss

2008

Records Management Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…During the 1980s, the changes of administrative and juridical structures and the proliferation of electronic records across all branches of social institutions brought an increased attention to the porous lines dividing archival and records management practices, questioning the validly of such distinction (Ham, 1981;Atherton, 1985)[5]. This gave rise to a new conceptualization of the scope and goals of these practices, one advocating for the proactive management of organizational records prior to their inclusion in archives and founded on a pluralistic understanding of the shifting meaning and value of records as evidence of organizational activities and sources of collective memory across space and time (Upward, 1996(Upward, , 1997McKemmish, 2001;Tough, 2004). Parallel to that, the growing prominence of digital information technologies necessitated the repositioning of archival and recordkeeping practices in the context of the evolving digital information domain (Gilliland, 2000;Duranti, 2001;Cunningham, 2008;Yakel, 2007;Lee and Tibbo, 2011).…”

Section: The Interpretive Paradigm In Archival and Recordkeeping Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Practice theory: a new approach for archival and recordkeeping research

Ivanov

2017

RMJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to introduce a qualitative research approach based on current developments in the field of practice theory. The novelty of this approach is that it positions organizational practices as a central unit of analysis of archival and recordkeeping work. The goal of the paper is to highlight the continuity between practice theory and archival and recordkeeping scholarship and to then propose how practice theory could be used in archival and recordkeeping research. Design/methodology/approach The paper traces the continuity between practice theory and two influential bodies of literature in archival and recordkeeping scholarship developed in the last two decades. It then outlines a practice theory research agenda for archival and recordkeeping research by drawing on the disciplines of cultural sociology, science and technology studies, ethnomethodology and organizational studies. The potential research application of practice theory is illustrated with examples from an on-going doctoral project on appraisal and preservation practices in a digital broadcasting archive. Findings The analysis of current literature shows an agreement that archival and recordkeeping practices exhibit a complexity that makes them important foci for further research. By placing these insights into contact with practice theory, the paper champions a new research agenda for archival and recordkeeping research. Originality/value The paper positions and outlines the tenets of practice theory, making them methodologically available to archival and recordkeeping scholars and practitioners. It also indicates how practice theory offers a new perspective for conceptualizing the causal effects of organizational culture on organizational practices.

show abstract

“…For many years a spirited debate has taken place over the custody of digital records (Tough, 2004). There are those who argue that records created digitally should be retained by the creating agency and the future role of archivists should be as facilitators of access (Upward, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Scope and Appetite for Technology-Assisted Sensitivity Reviewing of Born-Digital Records in a Resource Poor Environment

Tough

2018

Handbook of Research on Heritage Management and Preservation

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Concerns about sensitive content in born-digital records seem to be a major factor in inhibiting the deposit of public records in dedicated digital repositories in Western countries. These concerns are much exacerbated by the changed nature of the process of reviewing records. The University of Glasgow, working in collaboration with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, received funding to investigate the technology-assisted sensitivity reviewing of born-digital records. As part of this research, some preliminary research in a commonwealth country in Sub-Saharan Africa was carried out. The research, reported in this chapter, was carried out in Malawi by the late Dr. Mathews J. Phiri. He found that already there is a real, albeit limited, demand for technology-assisted sensitivity reviewing of born-digital records in Malawi. The available evidence suggests that within the next decade there is likely to be an increase in the need for effective means of assessing sensitivity in born-digital records.

show abstract

The post‐custodial/pro‐custodial argument from a records management perspective

Cited by 4 publications

References 4 publications

We are archivists, but are we OK?

We are archivists, but are we OK?

Practice theory: a new approach for archival and recordkeeping research

The Scope and Appetite for Technology-Assisted Sensitivity Reviewing of Born-Digital Records in a Resource Poor Environment

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About