Can Records Change?

Community Topic(s):

Keywords: records, sharepoint, managed metadata

Current Rating:
(0 ratings)

This time, the title is actually a question, and it’s one that we are dealing with right now. We have resolved the issue, but I’m not sure that we fully understand the subject. We resolved it the way companies often resolve things, we played it safe.

If you have read either this blog or my personal SharePoint blog lately, you know that we have been working on a project to support the creation, storage and disposition of our engineering inspection reports. These reports are a primary work-product for us, so we want this solution to be a good one. I am pleased with the work of my team, and I am very happy with the capabilities of SharePoint that we have used to manipulate the myriad pieces in this puzzle. Late last week, one of SharePoint’s awesome capabilities rose in front of us as a major obstacle – Managed Metadata. I won’t bore you with the gory details, but we wanted to copy the managed metadata terms from our collaborative document space along with the final PDF as we placed it in our Records Library. Copying managed metadata in a SharePoint Designer workflow is not easy. I’ll stop short of saying it’s impossible, but it grew to that level in my mind. As it sometimes happens, our problems lead us to a solution that we liked better than our original plan. That’s a long story, and one that isn’t completely written yet. Along the way though, we started scratching our heads over whether or not we even wanted our solution to work. Our dilemma:

If we put the final PDF copy of our report into a Records Library in which the records include managed metadata columns, the value in those columns will change over time. Note: I verified that the managed metadata does continue to reflect value changes, even after a document is declared as a record. The question is should the data change? We are grouped into two schools of thought regarding this question. One school says that changing the metadata is no different than changing the label on a file folder and that the change actually keeps the record more accurate over time. The latter part of this argument is true, one of the managed metadata fields is “operating company” which can change as companies are bought and sold. We use managed metadata specifically to address this issue. As the company name changes, we change the term and add the old name as an alias. The result is great; the name is always current but we can still search on old names.

The second school of thought is based on the fear of having to say “these records can’t be changed after they are created, except for the stuff that does change.” I fall into this group, the group who doesn’t like having to explain things. Having been deposed once while serving as an expert witness, I don’t ever want to be questioned over how immutable records can be changed. I spoke with one of our attorneys about this, and he said: “you could probably make the argument that the business record isn’t actually changing, but if nothing about it changed, then you wouldn’t have to argue at all.” We think we have come up with a pretty slick way to leave the records alone, but still not miss any reports during a search if things like names or companies change. I will write about that solution when we finish building it. In the meantime, I would appreciate your thoughts on this issue, and I invite you to comment below.

Report

Rate Post

You need to log in to rate blog posts. Click here to login.

Add a Comment

You need to log in to post messages. Click here to login.

Comments

Chris Walker

Change is Good.

There is nothing wrong with records changing over time. Consider that many records are active for years after they are declared / created (e.g.: employee files, social services case files, building development permitting, corporate policies, etc.).

The key with records that change is to make sure that the changes are captured / documented in a manner that is auditable and can stand up in court if necessary.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Daniel Antion

Thanks Chris

You raise very good point. In this case, we wanted to be able to know/say that "this was the report that was issued on this date and nothing has chnaged." If we have follow-up informaiton,we store that separately, as we would with subsequent reports.

But your point is helpful, in that it reminds me that not all records are the same.

Thanks again,
Dan
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Stephanie Eaton

Good point!

I completely agree with Chris! Of course records change! Even in the paper world records change. Make sure all actions (not just changes) are tracked on your records. It is sometimes just as important to know when information is exported and viewed as it is when there are changes made.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Daniel Antion

Interesting Challenge

Chris & Stephanie, Thanks again for the comments. I terms of what we were trying to do, add managed metadata columns to a records library, your saying it wouldn't be a problem as long as we documented changes. That sounds good, but I have to look into how we would track the changes to the Term Store.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Daniel Antion

This Just In

Ok, as I follow this question on Twitter, the concensus there seems to be that each change results in a new unique record. We really want to preserve the relationship between a specific inspection, on a specific date and we want to be able to say that the record did not change. I'm not sure I want a series of records (if what these people are suggesting is the case). I understand the logic here, but I've never argued the validity of a record (and I don't ever want to).
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Sean Hederman

Metadata Changes & Versioning

Love this article; it's a topic near to my heart. Was going to write a response as a comment; but once I got to almost a page, I decided to blog about it instead: http://blogs.palantir.co.za/signate/archive/2011/07/19/metadata-changes-amp-versioning.aspx
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Daniel Antion

Great Post

Thanks Sean. I love it when a blog post spawns another blog post. You provide some very good information in you post that helps explain this curious issue.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Randy Moeller

It may be important, it may not...

Different question than “Is metadata part of a record?” We know the answer is yes. I do not believe that the ‘changing’ of a record will have a cut and dry answer but will be affected by the record in question, your business and your risk tolerance level.

How much does it matter when metadata changes because a record moved to a new system? Does the record still purport what it is? Is there a change to its context or non-metadata content? Do I still know it’s an invoice for product X for a capitol project that was paid to company X?

The paper world may have seemed little more forgiving as no one may even remember the post-it-note that was on a document for a while or what it said. There may be no real trace of the record’s move to a new system but you have a better chance to document what took place. We know to never cross the line of changing what a record purports to be or the business evidence it provides. A higher caution is needed when your metadata is involved.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Daniel Antion

Thanks - this was my concern

Thanks Randy. You raise the very point that troubles us - metadata. We know that the reocrd is not going to change. It is our copy of a final report and these reports are never modified. If there is anything that should change, we issue a follow-up report. I was concerned about the metadata changing, and since it is managed terms, maybe changing without us recording it (distributed permissions).

I think you are right when you say there won't be a cut and dry answer. that's why I asked our legal folks.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Greg Cook

It depends on the type of metadata....

I am not a SharePoint guy myself, so if my response misses the mark, I apologize now.
But, I believe there are three different types of information to manage. First, you have the record itself. Any content stored within the document that has been declared a record needs to be preserved from alteration of any kind.
Second, you have metadata pertaining to the record’s properties. This would include things like the original creation date of the record, when it was declared a record, who created it originally, who declared it a record (maybe automated), etc.
Lastly, you have metadata pertaining to storing the record and how a user would find the record. These values could overlap some of the values in the second group. This group of metadata might change like the weather, but that is fine because it does not change the content of the record nor the properties of the record itself. It only changes the way a user would find the record.
The reason to differentiate these into three categories is to meet various needs. Legal requirements want to ensure that the first two categories exist and are unalterable to make their lives easier. The last category is for end users that need to find and review declared records to perform their day to day jobs easily. If an account number changes due to a change in the system processing it, the users don’t want to perform two separate searches to find those records, they want to update the existing record’s classification metadata to match the new system, thus unifying their information in an easier to use structure.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Sean Hederman

Absolutely...

But also now consider that you may still want to search the ORIGINAL metadata as well, and certainly be able to view it.

I did a post on this very topic at http://blogs.palantir.co.za/signate/archive/2011/07/19/metadata-changes-amp-versioning.aspx just yesterday
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Jacqueline White

Is the search metadata part of the record?

I agree with trying to put boundaries on the types of metadata their function and "record" compliance requirements. Agree that once an item is declared a record its primary properties - original metadata associated with the item when it was made a record. Each version and revision (for controlled documents) are also individual records in their own right. The metadata for searching and using the item is also a record especially if this is the evidence required to demo that the user used the correct "metadata" to search and use a document that may have caused injury? Shouldn't changes to metadata be done as part of a change management process? Shouldn't we view the process as we have to provide an audit trail to show effort in compliance and due diligence. Audit trails can be as easy a comments providing a reason for a single change to a record or a mapping of old to new metadata.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Daniel Antion

Great Input

I really appreciate the input this post is generating. So far, I think we may have taken a cautious, but not overly cautious approach. If you want to read about our solution, see http://bit.ly/q9kBeS for a description.

At first glance, SharePoint’s Managed Metadata ensures that as things like plant ownership change, a search would always find all the documents. Of course, like anything else, that’s only true if the person making the change remembers to put the old value is as an alias in the Term Store. Our caution stems from anticipating, possibly imagining questions like “can you prove that aliases were always created?” “Could someone, hide a record by improperly changing an element in the Term Store after the record was created?” Perhaps we have watched too many episodes of Law & Order, but we didn’t like the answers we would have for those questions.

I think that as records management systems begin including more and more advanced features, we have to focus on the fundamentals that you have all mentioned. Thanks again for sharing your insight!
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

Carol Garnham, CRM, ermM

I love analogies.......

I was going to raise the issue of content vs. context insofar as the metadata goes; but as I read on, I see that Randy M. has made the point for the most part.

Think of it like this,
* the content = the report,
* the context = the metadata columns, and then, of course,
* the system generated file properties which add another layer (Sorry)

Now to my analogy, regardless, of whether you wear a navy suit with white sunglasses (please don't) or tan khakis with dockers, you are still the same person under all of those different outfits and we can still recognize you! So, choose your clothes and your metadata thoughtfully.
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply
Daniel Antion

Ooh Fashion Tip Too

Thanks Carol for adding your thoughts. I find analogies very helpful. I am disappointed about that recommendation, I like my white sunglasses :)
Report
Was this helpful? Yes No
Reply

This post and comment(s) reflect the personal perspectives of community members, and not necessarily those of their employers or of AIIM International