Chris Flynn <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>Aren't we running the risk of being accused of "selective destruction" if we
>keep those things that reflect favorably on the company but destroy anything
>that we think may be problematical later?

Actually, it sounds more like "selective retention" rather than selective destruction to me.  If you have a solid policy for how to evaluate materials to determine that AFTER they have met their retention requirement for business purposes, based on their historic relevance to your organization, they are collected and transfered to an organizational archive, then I don't see where this would be a problem.

And as mentioned by David earlier, many organizations don't have a "formal archives", but they may have a "company historian" or other individual who gathers and manages articles of historic and/or other enduring value to the organization.

As long as there is some written policy that addresses WHY these items that should have been destroyed (according to the retention schedule) are being retained, it shouldn't be problematic.

Also, these may not ALWAYS be things that are "favorable" to a company, I'm sure some of the things related to the "Great Blackout of 2003" are of significance to the affected companies, and will be retained as part of a "lessons learned" collection, but they may not ever be viewed as "favorable" =)


List archives at
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance