Recording integrity: assessing records' content after enron: in the post-Enron, Sarbanes-Oxley environment, RIM professionals must expand their thinking and responsibilities to improve and more proactively manage the information content in organizations' corporate records.

• Author: Dietel, J. Edwin

At the Core

This Article

* discuss 19 criteria to measure the overall quality of information contained in corporate records

* explains how the quality of corporate records affects compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act

* provides basic recordkeeping fundamentals that an affective corporate records audit should address

A culture in records and information management (RIM) circles seems to be emerging, one fostering greater concern about the form of corporate records than the substantive content they contain. Clearly, form and format (e.g., paper, electronic, microforms) present issues that need attention. Ultimately, however, the most significant concern lies in the information the records contain, notwithstanding the form in which they reside. Records managers then need to become even more aware of valuing their primary subject matter--the information content of their corporate records--because in the post Enron/Arthur Andersen era, content rather than form will emerge as the most critical concern.

A Necessary Paradigm Shift

Several bedrock elements contribute to the paradigm shift that is required of the traditional RIM culture, including

* a more detailed understanding of the business in which the organization is engaged

* an appreciation of the factors that determine the quality of the information the records contain

* a willingness to serve other corporate professionals as recognized and respected experts in the RIM/knowledge management (KM) field

* an attitude of performing corporate records audits with a constructive, value-adding mentality rather than from an accusatory one

These basic elements must be undertaken in a turbulent corporate world that has been turned on its head by many causes, including Enron, Arthur Andersen, MCI-WorldCom, Tyco, and the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. If this fundamental paradigm shift from form to content can be realized, corporate records audits will be much more productive, effective, and valuable.

While the form and necessary processes of RIM are critically important, records managers need to expand their thinking and responsibilities to focus on dealing with and more actively managing the information content in their records. How, for example, can CEOs responsibly make the necessary certifications required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which was passed by Congress to ensure corporate accountability, if their records contain information content contrary to what they are certifying? Admittedly, this is not an easy problem to solve, but it is one that demands much thought and work. Most of that thought should come through the records audit process with leadership and implementation from records managers.

Effecting the Paradigm Shift

A business paradigm is a model, a pattern, or an example of a way of doing business. A paradigm shift is a fundamental change in that model. For example, for years the Swiss were the recognized experts in the watchmaking business. In 1968, they owned 65 percent of the world sales and more than 80 percent of the world's profits in this industry. By 1980, however, their market share had collapsed to less than 10 percent and their profits to less than 20 percent. This was due to a major paradigm shift in the watchmaking industry: the move from mechanical to electronic watches. As Joel Arthur Barker notes in his book, Paradigms: The Business of Discovering the Future, everything the Swiss were good at--making gears, bearings, and mainsprings--became largely irrelevant in the era of the electronic watch.

Expertise in Business Purposes and Operations

The first necessary element of the paradigm shift toward the content of corporate records requires records managers to develop basic expertise in the fundamentals of the business. In simplest terms, knowledge of the business' positions necessitates that records managers appreciate what information and knowledge is critically important to the business' future and whether that information is being captured and preserved properly and adequately in the records.

Records and recordkeeping in an organization can be perceived in one of two ways. It may be something one has to do, much like paying taxes, or it may be an opportunity to preserve information critical to business success so it can be shared easily and readily with those in the business who need that information and knowledge to make their contributions more valuable. If those responsible for providing RIM are seen as knowing little about the goals and purposes of the business, it is likely that recordkeeping will be perceived as a necessary evil rather than something that positively contributes to the business' success.

Information about the critical aspects of the particular business--rather than about forms and formats--is among the most important criteria for success as a records manager. If the information in corporate records does not relate to the particular business goals and purposes, it has little meaning to the business' future.

Quality of Information

Measuring the quality of the information in corporate records is, however, not a simple, single quantitative metric, nor are all the quality measures of the same importance for every organization. However, effective RIM programs will be attentive to each element of information quality and, together with corporate management, will determine how important each element is to identifiable corporate operations. Often, this effort can be completed most effectively as a part of the corporate records audit process.

There are at least 19 criteria that should be evaluated to measure the overall quality of the information contained in corporate records.

Accuracy

Misleading or inaccurate information in corporate records may be the basis for legal liability. It is better to have no records at all than inaccurate records because inaccurate records typically cause actions that are incorrectly focused or pointed in the wrong direction. At one level, accuracy refers to a lack of simple errors in transcription, collection, or aggregation. At another level, accuracy is affected by resolution of measurements. How finely detailed should this accuracy be? Simple perceptions about the accuracy are also important; if the receiver of the information does not trust the source, then the data's accuracy is questionable. Reliability and credibility also matter and relate to accuracy. Many managers develop and build multiple knowledge channels or sources to corroborate and build trust in the knowledge they collect and maintain.

Completeness

Incomplete information is akin to inaccuracy, yet different. Information may be accurate but incomplete, and holes give rise to inaccurate or incorrect speculation. Information that leads to speculation is counterproductive because it leads to action that is incorrectly focused or misdirected.

Precision

Information in the record should be as precise as possible, particularly where it specifies dimensions. For example, parts may not properly fit together if the tolerance in their size is too large...