Information Governance Roadmap for the Next 3 Years

Information Governance:
Planning for the Next 3 Years
Richard Medina, Doculabs
AIIM-Wisconsin / Milwaukee Bar Association 6th Annual Electronic Discovery Conference
November 1, 2013

1. Introduction and Background to the
Issues

2. Program Framework, Roadmap, and
Recommendations
3. Example Problem: Defensible
Disposition
4. Next Steps

Agenda

Resources
• There are lots of resources on
the issues I discuss.
• http://www.aiim.org/community
/blogs/expert/Resources-forInformation-GovernancePlanning-for-the-Next-3-Years

© Doculabs, Inc. 2013

3

Resources: Introduction and Background to the Issues

1. Introduction and Background to the Issues
– Planning the Next 3 Years (2011 to 2014)
• How to Get from 1998-Style Records Management to Information
Governance for 2018
• How to Calculate ROI for E-Discovery (with Calculator)
• A Reference Model for Systems of Engagement and Systems of Record
• A Content Technology Roadmap
• How to Succeed at Mobile Content Management
• 6 Key Considerations to Going Mobile
• Two AIIM Webinars and a Survey on Mobile Content Management


Resources: Program Framework, Roadmap, and Recommendations

2. Program Framework, Roadmap, and Recommendations
A.

Overall Program Strategy
• How to Develop and Implement your Discovery Readiness Program
• Which part of E-Discovery Should You Fix First?
• How Should Large Companies Manage the Lifecycle of their Dynamic
Content?
• How to Succeed at Email Management if You’re a Midsized Organization

B.

Governance and Operations
• Are You Hiring a Records Manager?
• E-Discovery Roles and Responsibilities in a Successful Litigation Readiness
Program
• Records Management Roles and Responsibilities in a Successful RM Program
• The ECM Governance Model

C.

Information Organization
• You Gotta Know the Territory: How to Segment your ESI
• A Manageable Taxonomy of Taxonomy Management Tools



2. Program Framework, Roadmap, and Recommendations
C.

Process Design and Implementation
• E-D Process Flow Diagrams for your Current and Target Future State
• 3 Best Practices for Developing Records Management Policies and
Procedures
• The Difference between Records Management Policies, Procedures, and
Guidelines
• The Processes for Managing your RM Rules
• Here’s the First Draft of your Social Media Policy

D.

Architecture and Technology
• How Different is Legal Document Management?
• How to Start your Company ECM Program with Legal Document
Management
• Immediately Stop Using Tape for Archiving

E. Communications and Training
• (nothing yet)


Resources: Example Problem: Defensible Disposition

3. Example Problem: Defensible Disposition
• A 4-Step Methodology for Defensible Disposition
• Developing your Assessment Plan for Defensible Disposition
• Defensible Disposition in a Nutshell: My AIIM Talk


Issues
A.

Preliminaries

B.

Planning the Next 3 Years (2011 to 2014)

C.

Planning the Next 3 Years (2014 to 2017))

Agenda


12

• No “Chicken Little” FUD slides
– E-discovery risks are well known (though we can address if folks would
find it useful)
– We’ll focus on how to address the problem

• Three key distinctions about how to be “proactive”:
1. Execution vs. Design: doing day-to-day “run-time” activities according to
some plan… versus the plan itself
2. Post-trigger vs. Pre-trigger: what you do after a discovery event has
started vs. the what you do before the lawsuit hits
3. Driving Blind vs. using Early Case Assessment (ECA): applies only to posttrigger processes, and pertains to whether you can develop a strategy for
the litigation as soon as possible after the trigger event


Three Hard Problems (2011 – 2014)

1. What should you do during discovery?
– Solution: EDRM

2. What should you do before discovery?
– Solution: Tiering or “zones”

3. Who should do what?
– Solution: Cross-functional and Balanced Roles
These approaches work, but you need a program to carry
them out effectively.


13

2011 Problem #1: What Should You Do During Discovery?

14

The Discovery Funnel
Why It’s a Problem

Backup Data

Archive Data

(Disaster Recovery)

Active Data

Total volume of Discoverable Data

Discovery Response
Servers
· Data
· Email

Desktops - Laptops

PDA’s
Internal
External
Non-responsive Data/info

eDiscovery Tools:

Responsive Data / Info

Servers
· Data
· Email

· Privileged – Record & log
· Not Privileged - Produce

Desktops - Laptops
Context
Indexing,
Culling,
De-dupe,
Embedded
file filters

Off-site Storage

Servers
· Data
· Email

Document,
Review
Investigate,
Analysis

Review
Flag-Tag,
Annotate,
De-dupe,
Export,
Report

(RM Retention Schedule)

Records Management and Identification

Outsourced Service Tools:

Preserve Collection

Processing, Hosting
(Analysis) and Review

Production and
Presentation

2011 Solution: Plan and Manage with the EDRM


15

2011 Problem #2: What Should You Do Before Discovery?
Too Narrow

Too Wide

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability

Other Business-related
Information (OBRI)

Declared Records

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Risk

Information (OBRI)

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information


16

Declared Records

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability

Consider this Simple Set of Information Governance Rules


But Even Simple Rules Need Clarification

1. What’s a Legal Hold?
2. What are Records versus Non-Records?
3. What are Non-Records – which are still important for business
purposes?
4. What about Non-Records that are not business-related?
5. Where do documents under Legal Hold fit? Are they Records,
Non-Records, or what?


What is the Scope of RM?

Declared Records

Information (OBRI)

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Manageability


• Think about your ESI
(electronically stored
information) in terms of
its Risk, Value, and
Manageability.
• For simplicity, let’s just
use Risk and
Manageability.


Risk

• For simplicity, let’s just
use Risk and
Manageability.

Electronically
Stored
Information (ESI)

Manageability



• One major source of risk
for ESI is its “Likely
Discoverability”.

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Electronically
Stored
Information (ESI)

Manageability


• While all ESI is perhaps
“discoverable”, we can
prioritize the more likely
and harmful ESI.


Declared Records

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Electronically
Stored
Information (ESI)

Manageability


• Your RM program
probably declares only a
subset of your LDI and ESI
as records – these are
your most valuable, risky,
and manageable
electronic documents.


Declared Records

Information (OBRI)

Non-business-related
Information (NBRI)

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Physical
Documents and
Electronically
Stored
Information (ESI)

1. But most of your content
and documents are nonrecords -- and range
from very low to very
high risk and value.
2. Most of the ESI on your
shared drives, hard
drives, and in email is
OBRI.
3. Some is NBRI.

Manageability


4. It’s a mess.


Too Narrow

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Information (OBRI)

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Declared Records

Manageability


Likely
Discoverable
Information

Risk

Information (OBRI)

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Too Wide

Declared Records

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability

2011 Solution: Use a Tiered Approach

• A much more effective
approach is to divide your ESI
into three “Tiers”.

• Tier 1 denotes your declared
records, specified by a Records
Retention Schedule.
Tier 2
Information (OBRI)

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Risk

Likely
Discoverable
Information

Tier 3

Tier 1

Declared Records

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability


• Tier 2 denotes the OBRI that is
important to retain for
business reasons.
• Tier 3 denotes the OBRI that is
not important to retain for
business reason; it also
denotes NBRI, which – by
definition -- is not important to
retain for business reasons.

“Treat them Differently”

• Tiered Approach
– Different types of physical
documents
and ESI are handled differently
Tier 2
Information (OBRI)

Likely
Discoverable
Information

1
Declared Records
Tier 1

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Risk

2

4

3

Tier 3

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability


1. Keep as records
2. Keep as non-records, but move to
rigorous ECM/RIM system
3. Keep on (better managed) shared
drives
4. Don't worry about them; they aren't
worth it – keep or dispose according
to
general rules

Now This Tree Makes Sense


2011 Problem #3: Who Should Do What?

30

Step 1
Determine what information would be relevant to dispute

Step 2
Identify each data source that potentially contains relevant information

If data source likely to contain relevant information
If data source
not reasonably
likely to
contain
relevant
information

Step 3
Determine degree of accessibility of data sources that are likely to
contain relevant information (see figure 2)

If there is high
degree of
accessibility

If there is low degree of accessibility

Yes

Step 4
Do substantially similar copies of relevant information exist in more
readily accessible data source?
No

Yes
Preservation
Not Required

Step 5
Is cost or burden of preservation excessive as compared to the
relevance or value of the information?

No
Preservation
Required

Figure 1: Decision Tree for Determining ESI Preservation Obligations (Sedona Working Group)

2011 Problem #3: Who Should Do What?

31

Who decides the “degree of
accessibility” – IT or Legal?

“Reasonably likely”
Means exactly what?
Step 1
Determine what information would be relevant to dispute

Step 2
Identify each data source that potentially contains relevant information

If data source likely to contain relevant information
If data source
not reasonably
likely to
contain
relevant
information

Step 3
Determine degree of accessibility of data sources that are likely to
contain relevant information (see figure 2)

If there is high
degree of
accessibility

If there is low degree of accessibility

Yes

Step 4
Do substantially similar copies of relevant information exist in more
readily accessible data source?
No

Yes
Preservation
Not Required

Step 5
Is cost or burden of preservation excessive as compared to the
relevance or value of the information?

No
Preservation
Required

“Burden of preservation”, “excessive as compared to relevance”, “value of
information” – Far too nebulous for the common person to figure out!

2011 Solution: Cross-Functional and Balanced Roles

32

• Legal:
– Responsible for the overall program, policies, practices, and monitoring (program
responsibilities)
– Responsible for the coordination and execution of the E-D process (discovery event
responsibilities).

• IT:
– Responsible for working with Legal to establish realistic IM practices for the program,
ensuring that current systems can align with program requirements (program
responsibilities).
– Responsible for executing specific technical tasks within the E-D process (discovery event
responsibilities).

• Business:
– Record Retention Leaders or site coordinators are responsible for working with Legal and IT
reps to communicate program requirements and expectations to users (program
responsibilities).
– Record Retention Leaders are responsible for monitoring particular custodians’ activities
during E-D (discovery event responsibilities).
– Individual users are responsible for adhering to program requirements (program
responsibilities), and individual custodians are responsible for carrying out required tasks

You Need a Program Framework to Plan and Manage your Roadmap
E-Discovery Program Categories






Communications and Training

Category

Key Components

Overall Program
Strategy

The overall vision and strategy for litigation readiness. This
strategy should address existing visions and strategies for
enterprise content management (ECM) and for records
management (RM), and should address any gaps that may
exist. This strategy should also establish general principles for
the level of resources the organization will apply to the
program at a high level.

· RM vision, strategy, and roadmap
· ECM vision, strategy, and roadmap
· A litigation readiness vision, strategy, and roadmap
that addresses the RM and ECM strategies and
addresses gaps
· Principles for resources

Governance and
Operations

The governance structure and operational structure(s) for
implementing the litigation readiness strategy. Includes roles,
responsibilities, program governance metrics, policies,
procedures, and guidelines.

· Governance structure (roles, responsibilities)
· Operational structure (roles, responsibilities)
· “Rules” – policies, procedures, and guidelines – for
records management and e-Discovery

Information
Organization

The manner in which information is organized. This includes
a content taxonomy or organizational hierarchy, a record plan
and retention schedule, and a content map of the
organization’s electronically stored information (ESI) and
content repositories.

· Content taxonomy
· Records retention plan
· ESI-Repository Map

Process Design
and
Implementation

The overall processes used to support litigation readiness.
These include the e-Discovery process itself, as well as the
overall records/information lifecycle management process.

· Discovery process
· Record/information lifecycle management process

Architecture and
Technology

The tools and technologies that are used or leveraged for
litigation readiness, and the architecture for how they fit
together. This can include specialist tools for e-Discovery as
well as technologies and capabilities for ECM, records
management, and email management.

·
·
·
·
·

Communications
and Training


Definition

The mechanisms used to educate the user community and
improve compliance and adoption of the procedures and
solutions that support litigation readiness.

· Communication plan/program
· Training plan/program

Architecture strategy
ECM tools and capabilities
Records management tools and capabilities
Email management tools and capabilities
E-Discovery tools and capabilities

33

Program Maturity Model and Benchmark


34

Issues
A.

Preliminaries

B.


C.

i.

What’s New (AIIM Survey Data on What’s Happening)

ii.

What’s New (A Map of What’s Happening)

Agenda

Expansion and Consolidation of ECM Systems (1<n<4)
Source: ©AIIM 2013 / ©Accellion 2013
“ECM at the Crossroads” survey

How many different ECM/DM/RM suppliers/systems does your organization
currently use?
0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

1 system
2 systems
3 systems
4 systems
5 systems
6 systems

7-10 systems
More than 10 systems

N=477

30%

Mobile Information is ... Important

How important is mobile information access to your organization?
0%
Essential

Somewhat important
Important in some groups but not the
whole organization
Not at all important

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

70%:
Essential or
somewhat
important

N=283

There are Lots of Official Ways to Access Content

Which of the following ways of accessing content on mobile devices are
officially sanctioned in your organization?
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Sync to desktops

49%:

Emailing attachments

Email

Consumer cloud content services, eg: Dropbox,
Skydrive, i-Cloud, Google Drive, YouSendIt

34%:

Content capture services, eg: Evernote, OneNote
Enterprise content services, eg: Box, Huddle,
Yammer, SharePoint 365

Sync

ECM access clients, eg. SharePlus, Accellion, or
vendor supplied apps.
Secure mobile data services
None of these
We don't have any official policies
N=281, normalized for Don’t know

There are Lots of Unofficial Ways to Access Content

To your knowledge, to what extent are the following unofficial ways of
accessing content on mobile devices in use in your organization?
0%

20%

40%

60%

80% 100%

Sync to desktops

85%:

Emailing attachments to self

Email Used
Inappropriately

Consumer cloud content services, eg: Dropbox,
Skydrive, i-Cloud, Google Drive, YouSendIt

Content capture services, eg: Evernote,
OneNote
Enterprise content services, eg: Box, Huddle,
Yammer, SharePoint 365
ECM access clients/apps, eg. SharePlus

Heavily used

In use

Not used
N=279, excl Don’t know


A Chicken Little Slide

How concerned are you about current practice in your organization for
sharing content to mobile devices?
Not at all
concerned,
12%

Extremely
concerned,
26%

A little
concerned,
19%

Extremely or
Somewhat
Concerned
Somewhat
concerned,
43%
N=282


2/3:

What’s Happening with the Content Technologies? We need a Map.
The content technologies have 3 dimensions – and in the last 5 years the third
one has exploded.
1.

Content Management
•

•

2.

Addresses the input, control, and output of electronic information.

It ranges on a scale from simple to complex.

Process Management
•
•

3.

Addresses the rules, orchestration, automation, and control of processes.
It ranges on a scale from simple to complex.

Participation Management
•

Addresses the amount and complexity of human engagement – of human
interaction, collaboration, collective deliberation, analysis, and creation.

•

It measures both the breadth and depth of such participation.


41

The 3 Dimensions of the Content Technologies
With a Focus on Participation Management


42

Level 1: Low Enterprise Participation


43

Level 2: Moderate Enterprise Participation


44

Level 3: High Enterprise, Low Extra-Enterprise Participation


45

Level 4: Moderate Extra-Enterprise Participation


46

Problem

Recommendations
3. Example Problem: Defensible
Disposition
4. Next Steps

Agenda

Recommendations
A.


B.


C.


D.


E.


F.


Agenda

You Need a Program Framework to Plan and Manage your Roadmap







Category

Key Components

Overall Program
Strategy

The overall vision and strategy for litigation readiness. This
strategy should address existing visions and strategies for
enterprise content management (ECM) and for records
management (RM), and should address any gaps that may
exist. This strategy should also establish general principles for
the level of resources the organization will apply to the
program at a high level.

· RM vision, strategy, and roadmap
· ECM vision, strategy, and roadmap
· A litigation readiness vision, strategy, and roadmap
that addresses the RM and ECM strategies and
addresses gaps
· Principles for resources

Governance and
Operations

The governance structure and operational structure(s) for
implementing the litigation readiness strategy. Includes roles,
responsibilities, program governance metrics, policies,
procedures, and guidelines.

· Governance structure (roles, responsibilities)
· Operational structure (roles, responsibilities)
· “Rules” – policies, procedures, and guidelines – for
records management and e-Discovery

Information
Organization

The manner in which information is organized. This includes
a content taxonomy or organizational hierarchy, a record plan
and retention schedule, and a content map of the
organization’s electronically stored information (ESI) and
content repositories.

· Content taxonomy
· Records retention plan
· ESI-Repository Map

Process Design
and
Implementation

The overall processes used to support litigation readiness.
These include the e-Discovery process itself, as well as the
overall records/information lifecycle management process.

· Discovery process
· Record/information lifecycle management process

Architecture and
Technology

The tools and technologies that are used or leveraged for
litigation readiness, and the architecture for how they fit
together. This can include specialist tools for e-Discovery as
well as technologies and capabilities for ECM, records
management, and email management.

·
·
·
·
·

Communications
and Training


Definition

The mechanisms used to educate the user community and
improve compliance and adoption of the procedures and
solutions that support litigation readiness.

· Communication plan/program
· Training plan/program

Architecture strategy
ECM tools and capabilities
Records management tools and capabilities
Email management tools and capabilities
E-Discovery tools and capabilities

49


50

Criteria
• Current state, future state, and program roadmap
• Litigation readiness
• Records management (RM) and enterprise content management (ECM)
components
• Resource management
• Financial analysis and Business Case for selected approach
Best in class
• Developed and implemented strategy and roadmap
• The strategy and roadmap address ECM, RM, e-discovery and email
management (EMM) at the enterprise level
Typical challenges
• No company-wide RM strategy or program in development
• No cohesive strategy for automated end-to-end litigation readiness, RM, and
ECM solutions








2011 Solution: Plan and Manage with the EDRM


51

Understanding Cost Justification for E-Discovery


52


53

Criteria
• Governance and operational structure (roles and responsibilities)
• Program governance metrics and monitoring
Best in class
• Governance and operational structure is implemented and operational
Typical challenges
• No defined governance structure for centralized accountability of records
management
• Most records management and litigation readiness roles and responsibilities
are not defined or in place (beyond site or department leaders or
coordinators)









Cross-Functional and Balanced Roles in Governance & Operations

54

• Legal:
– Responsible for the overall program, policies, practices, and monitoring (program
responsibilities)
– Responsible for the coordination and execution of the E-D process (discovery event
responsibilities).

• IT:
– Responsible for working with Legal to establish realistic IM practices for the program,
ensuring that current systems can align with program requirements (program
responsibilities).
– Responsible for executing specific technical tasks within the E-D process (discovery event
responsibilities).

• Business:
– Record Retention Leaders or site coordinators are responsible for working with Legal and IT
reps to communicate program requirements and expectations to users (program
responsibilities).
– Record Retention Leaders are responsible for monitoring particular custodians’ activities
– Individual users are responsible for adhering to program requirements (program
responsibilities), and individual custodians are responsible for carrying out required tasks


DISTRIBUTED/
VIRTUAL
RESOURCES

55

Executive Steering
Committee

Records and Information Management Group

DEDICATED
PROGRAM
RESOURCES
DISTRIBUTED/VIRTUAL
RESOURCES
(RECORDS ADVISORS)
DISTRIBUTED/VIRTUAL RESOURCES
(DEPARTMENT MANAGEMENT, RECORDS
COORDINATORS, EMPLOYEES)

PARTICIPATING GROUPS

CORE PROGRAM AREA

STEERING
COMMITTEE

Example Program Structure

Program
Staff

Program Manager

R&D, Regulatory,
and Medical Affairs

Legal

IT

R&D

Regulatory
Affairs

Medical Affairs

U.S. Legal

Application
Owners

Drug Safety
Evaluation

Global Pharma
Sciences

Allergan
Medical

Global Legal

Infrastructure
and
Architecture

Legal

IT Teams

R&D, Regulatory, and Medical Affairs


56

Criteria
• Taxonomy development and maintenance
• Records retention plan development and maintenance
• ESI-repository map development and maintenance
Best in class
• Developed and implemented taxonomy and retention plan, with
methodology for further development and maintenance
• Developed and maintained ESI-repository map
Typical challenges
• Likely inconsistencies in content organization between and within
departments
• No existing complete or partial ESI-repository map; considerable gaps in
documented understanding of where all electronically stored information
(ESI) resides








How an ESI Inventory Helps

• Tiered Approach
– Different types of physical
documents
and ESI are handled differently
Tier 2
Information (OBRI)

Likely
Discoverable
Information

1
Declared Records
Tier 1

Non-business
Information (NBI)

Risk

2

4

3

Tier 3

Electronically
Stored Information
(ESI)

Manageability


1. Keep as records
2. Keep as non-records, but move to
rigorous ECM/RIM system
3. Keep on (better managed) shared
drives
4. Don't worry about them; they aren't
worth it – keep or dispose according
to
general rules


58

Criteria
• Discovery process
• Records/information lifecycle management (ILM) process
• Records and litigation policies, procedures, guidelines
Best in class
• Discovery processes are evaluated, designed, implemented, monitored, and
maintained
• ILM processes are evaluated, designed, implemented, monitored, and
maintained
• “Rules” – policies, procedures, guidelines – are implemented and practiced
Typical challenges
• Limited electronic records (or data) archiving or destruction; processes for
retention, destruction, etc., are largely left up to departments or sites
• Many personal email archive folders, stored in disparate locations (e.g. hard
drives, personal drives, network drives); likely to increase without email
policy change










59


60

Criteria
• Architecture strategy
• ECM, RM, EMM, and e-discovery tools and capabilities
Best in class
• Developed and implemented architecture strategy for core ECM, ediscovery, RM, and EMM (where required)
• Technology portfolio is implemented, adequate, consolidated, and
maintained

Typical challenges
• Little relevant technology in place that is effectively used to improve
e-discovery effectiveness and efficiency
• The most common repositories for electronic content are likely email, hard
drives, personal drives, and shared drives (which can create records
management challenges)








Example E-D Requirements Specification for Solution Selection


61


62

Criteria
• Communication plan/program
• Training plan/program
Best in class
• Developed and implemented communications and training strategy
• Organization is adequately prepared to implement litigation readiness
program
Typical challenges
• No clear plan for communication and training on litigation readiness,
records management, and ECM
• Many users probably unaware of the litigation readiness and records
management policies and guidelines; performing what they think is the
“right thing to do”









Why Over-Retention is the Problem

• Corporations keep non-required electronic content forever
because:
– Classifying content (to determine what to keep and what to purge) is
manual and expensive
– Content worth preserving is mixed with content that should be purged
– Legal -- and others -- are afraid of wrongfully deleting materials
(spoliation)
– Additional storage is inexpensive, which makes it easy for corporations
to buy more storage and defer addressing the problem


Break the Big Problem into 2 Smaller Problems
• Addressing day-forward information lifecycle management (ILM) is much
easier to address than historical content
– Even though addressing it messes with employees’ day-to-day business activities

• Day-forward: Initiate ILM practices on a “day-forward” basis first, so any
new content created or saved is assigned a disposition period

• Guidance: Provide employees with explicit guidance for the acceptable use
of available tools for dynamic content and their associated retention periods
– Transient, WIP (3 years), Long Term (per Retention Schedule)

• Historical: For historical content, analyze the feasibility of content analytics
and autoclassification
– Recognize that cleaning up TBs of content can take years. So conduct the analysis
in 2014, begin the cleanup effort in earnest by 2015, and eliminate a large
portion of dated content by 2017


Guidance Example for Day-forward

System/Repository

Recommended Retention Period

Personal Network Drives
(“P” drives)

•

Provide each user with personal drive space of a limited size for their
storage, for as long as the user is employed

Shared Network Drives
(“G” drives)

•

Make them read only (which means no network storage for
collaboration; content will have to go into an ECM system)
Exceptions include application or systems that need to use network
storage

•
ECM System

1. Default for non records: retained for 3 years
2. Default for non records that have long-term value: retained for 7
years
3. Official records: retained per the retention schedule

Social Community Sites

•

•


No documents stored in communities (only links to documents in the
ECM system)
Consider retention periods for non-document content (e.g. 3 years)

The Defensible Disposition Methodology in a Nutshell
• You must satisfy 4 demands:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Regulatory retention requirements
Hold retention requirements
Business retention requirements
Cost impact of anything you do

• What you do has impact:
1. What you do
2. Effects of what you do

• You can do 2 things:
1. Sort
2. Dispose

• Your mission stated two ways:
1. Your mission is to satisfy your retention demands (1-3) while minimizing bad
cost impact to yourself (4)
2. Your mission is to maximize good cost impact (4) while satisfying your retention
requirements (1-3)

It’s Based on Reasonableness
• To determine what “satisfy your retention demands” really means for you,
use the Principle of Reasonableness and act In Good Faith

• Courts do not ask, expect or necessarily reward organizations for perfection.
Courts do expect, however, that whatever information management tactics
an organization undertakes are appropriate to how that particular entity is
situated (size, financial resources, regulatory and litigation profile, etc.). (Jim
McGann and Julie Colgan, “Implement a defensible deletion strategy to
manage risk and control costs”, Inside Counsel)


Your Defensible Disposition Methodology Has 4 Parts
1.

Defensible Disposition Policy
– It’s your design specification, your business rules for DD, your decision tree
– Specifies very clearly the objectives that your methodology will fulfill. It states
clearly what you mean by your retention requirements and what you mean by
reasonable costs when you are trying to fulfill your retention requirements.

2.

Assessment (Sorting) Plan
– What information and systems you’re assessing
– Your processing rules (decision plan)
– It will be flexible

3.

Technology Plan
– For Sorting and Disposing
– You must use technology – it’s not an option

4.

Disposition Plan
– Evaluate your assessment results using your DD Policy
– Dispose (which ranges from keeping forever to deleting right now with many
options in between)
– Refine your DD Policy (1) and continue as needed


Resources
• There are lots of resources on
the issues I discuss.
• http://www.aiim.org/community
/blogs/expert/Resources-forInformation-GovernancePlanning-for-the-Next-3-Years


71

Resources: Introduction and Background to the Issues
1.

Introduction and Background to the Issues
• How to Get from 1998-Style Records Management to Information Governance for
2018
• How to Calculate ROI for E-Discovery (with Calculator)
• A Reference Model for Systems of Engagement and Systems of Record
• A Content Technology Roadmap
• How to Succeed at Mobile Content Management
• 6 Key Considerations to Going Mobile
• Two AIIM Webinars and a Survey on Mobile Content Management


2.

Program Framework, Roadmap, and Recommendations
A.

• How to Develop and Implement your Discovery Readiness Program
• Which part of E-Discovery Should You Fix First?
• How Should Large Companies Manage the Lifecycle of their Dynamic Content?
• How to Succeed at Email Management if You’re a Midsized Organization

B.

• Are You Hiring a Records Manager?
• E-Discovery Roles and Responsibilities in a Successful Litigation Readiness Program
• Records Management Roles and Responsibilities in a Successful RM Program
• The ECM Governance Model

C.

• You Gotta Know the Territory: How to Segment your ESI
• A Manageable Taxonomy of Taxonomy Management Tools


2.

Program Framework, Roadmap, and Recommendations
C.

• E-D Process Flow Diagrams for your Current and Target Future State
• 3 Best Practices for Developing Records Management Policies and Procedures
• The Difference between Records Management Policies, Procedures, and Guidelines
• The Processes for Managing your RM Rules
• Here’s the First Draft of your Social Media Policy

D.

• How Different is Legal Document Management?
• How to Start your Company ECM Program with Legal Document Management
• Immediately Stop Using Tape for Archiving

E. Communications and Training
• (nothing yet)


3.

Example Problem: Defensible Disposition
• A 4-Step Methodology for Defensible Disposition
• Developing your Assessment Plan for Defensible Disposition
• Defensible Disposition in a Nutshell: My AIIM Talk


Information Governance Roadmap for the Next 3 Years

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (13)

Similar to Information Governance Roadmap for the Next 3 Years

Similar to Information Governance Roadmap for the Next 3 Years (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Information Governance Roadmap for the Next 3 Years