Papyrus for Records Management and more …

These were questions that were posted about doing Records Management with Papyrus:

  1. – Can retention policies be declarative described and dynamically assigned (rules)? YES
  2. – Can records be divided in so called sub-files to apply different retention policies? YES
  3. – Is there support for classification schemes aka taxonomy (industry specific) and if so how is classification being done (manual, automatic, pre-defined)? Yes, the taxonomoy is definable and classification can be trained and then highly automated. It is part of our Capture process.
  4. – Is there support for audit trailing? YES.
  5. – Is there support for Retention and Disposition Schedules? YES
  6. – How is backup and Recovery of the records and meta-data addressed? The internal back procedure of Papyrus takes care of archiving data on nodes.
  7. – Is there support for shredding (destroying)? YES (date triggered)
  8. – Is there support for “disposal holds” (to prevent destroying of specific documents)? YES
  9. – What about the workflow (e.g. review, approval) of certain actions like disposition? YES, is freely definable.
  10. – Can records being transfered to other locations, systems? If so, is the original then destructed afterwards? That is freely definable.
  11. – Could you tell a bit more about Inbound (capture) does it include also email management? YES. Emails are captured and then classified.
  12. – Do i understand correctly that ISIS supports RM for Outbound (how)? YES. Once the document is ready to be sent it an be archived as record without additional functionality needed.
  13. – Is DoD 5015.2-STD supported (how) and if so is Papyrus certified? NO.
  14. – Is MoReq2 (European) supported (how) and if so is Papyrus certified? NO. In the plans.

You will find my complete position on Records Management on my ‘Welcome To The Real World’ blog.

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Papyrus for Records Management and more …

  1. Hi Max,

    Knowing you a little, I expected some more comments about the DoD and MoReq2 questions. Your answer (‘No’) is a little to short here 😉

    In fact the questions would be better phrased as ‘Can a Papyrus implementation meet the requirements of DoD 5015.2 or MoReq2’.

    Papyrus being certified doesn’t buy your customer anything so I’m glad you didn’t go the lengthy and expensive road to certification. After all it is the actual implementation TOGETHER with the business environment in which it is used, that needs to meet those requirements. It’s not a software only thing.
    If everybody would know this, they wouldn’t be bothering you with those questions. Unfortunately only a few do.

    Having said that, you post is spot on. Especially in a greenfield scenario. A scenario where nothing exists or old stuff is replaced by something new with the ability to rethink as if it didn’t exist before.

    The sad fact is that nobody cared before. If they had taken good care about their businesses, there would not have been things like compliance, MoReq2 or DoD 5015.2. In that world internal ethics would have enforced compliance to unwritten rules and regulations. Many believed that we lived in such a world. Few knew better. But we all should have know better. Ever since the Ten Commandments – that date from 3500 years ago – we need rules and regulations.
    But I’m getting side-tracked here.
    Anyway, as a result, the majority of what exists today on products and implementations of those products lack at best the usage and what a $$$ market that is becoming for many system implementer. I sincerely hope that they – second time around – will do it right this time.

    Regards,
    Ed

  2. Hi Ed, thanks for the comment. You know me well. 😉

    The reason I did actually just write a short NO to the certification question is that I do not care to much about them. Usually they are asked for by government organizations only and we do not do much work for them.

    Re: Rules and Regulations.
    Yes, we need them, but we have way too many. The problem is however the fragmentation and therefore overlapping rules and scopes that are completely unmanageable. A retention rule is in fact a business rule, so why do I have an archive system, a BPM system, a ECM system, a business rule system and a records management system with different implementations. Makes no sense whatsoever!

    We have been recommending a consolidated approach since the beginning of this Millenium. Let’s see how long it will take …

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s