considerations for Records creation

Creation of records:


This may require a resource reallocation—but should not necessarily result in a cost to the overall budget. Though short-term expense may be incurred in changing recordkeeping frameworks, this can be offset by increased productivity by freeing up the time of most APS employees, and the expected efficiency gains from more ready access to useful records

Archives’ DIRKS process

Workflow and risk analysis is a key consideration when developing policies and directions to support good recordkeeping.

Workflow and risk analysis can be achieved through the DIRKS process (Designing and Implementing a Recordkeeping System) developed by the National Archives.

The DIRKS methodology consists of the following eight steps:

1.  preliminary investigation (Step A)

2.  analysis of business activity (Step B)

3.  identification of recordkeeping requirements (Step C)

4.  assessment of existing systems (Step D)

5.  identification of strategies for recordkeeping (Step E)

6.  design of a recordkeeping system (Step F)

7.  implementation of a recordkeeping system (Step G)

8.  post-implementation review (Step H).

AS ISO 15489).

For agencies, the new process will:

·         comprise only one step with one supporting document

·         focus only on higher level business activities (i.e. high level roles and responsibilities)

·         be supported by implementation advice so that they can take prompt disposal action

·         be flexible so that agencies can:

o    focus on core business for disposal authorisation

o    focus on particular categories of records that are creating storage problems and incurring costs.

As a simple guiding principle, the more important the occurrence the greater the requirement to create a record, and the more comprehensive that record needs to be.

·         Context—is it an important communication? Generally speaking, all official external communications will be important, while internal communications will generally be more important the more senior the people involved, or if they document a direction or decision that authorises action.

·         Financial value—the higher the value, the more likely due care and diligence require the making of a record in relation to any decision or action with financial implications (see also Financial Management and Accountability Act, Regulation 12), which requires any approval of expenditure of public money to be recorded in writing as soon as practicable.

·         Benefit—would ready access to such a record materially benefit the Commonwealth or the agency, as distinct from being of mere transitory, facilitative use to individuals? And would access to such a record provide a material benefit greater than the cost of producing such a record?

·         Potential loss or liability—would the lack of access to such a record expose the Commonwealth to loss or liability?

The level and standard of documentation needs to match the circumstances.

·         programme decisions, including decisions affecting individuals or individual businesses that may be subject to administrative review, together with the basis for the decisions and the authority for making the decision;

significant events,