Tables Table 1: Responding organisations by jurisdiction 12 Table 2: Information and knowledge management infrastructure 21 Table 4: Organisations with employees with information management or archival expertise 23 Table 5: Number of employees with information management or archival expertise 23 Table 7: Policies and protocols for facilitating external access to and return of information holdings 27 Figures Figure 1: Age of organisations (years) 12 Figure 2: Number of estimated employees 13 Figure 3: Size of PBC information holdings, by type 14
Research Field notes Video or film - digital Video or film - hard copy Other – please specify: In your opinion, how well organised are your holdings of these different types of information? Very organised Pretty well organised A little bit organised Not at all organised Not sure Audio recordings documents Documents and Reports– hard copy Documents and Reports – digital Genealogies Heritage survey reports Land management data Maps - GIS database Maps - hard copy Membership records
Does your organisation have a dedicated office and computer? NO YES Does your organisation have enough physical storage space for all your different kinds of native title information? NO YES Does your organisation have enough data storage capacity for all your digitised information? NO YES Does your organisation have a digitisation program in place to convert analog (hard copy) documents, photos and video into in to digital formats? NO YES Does your organisation have a filing system or data assets management system in place? NO YES Does your organisation have employees with expertise in information management or archiving? NO YES – How Many? Has your organisation ever received a or funding from government to specifically assist with information management issues? NO YES Does your organisation have a collections management plan? NO YES Is any of your native title information kept or held by other organisations? NO YES – Which organisations?
Arrival Tea and Coffee 9:00–9:10 Welcome Russell Taylor Principal, AIATSIS 9:10–9:20 Session 1 Overview of workshop objectives Ludger Dinkler 9:20–10:50 Session 2 Information management successes and aspirations Who are you and where are you from? What is your organisation’s greatest information management success? What is your greatest information management dream? Facilitator: Pamela McGrath 10:50–11:15 Morning tea 11:15–11:45 Session 3 The native information landscape Chair: Ludger Dinkler Grace Koch and Pamela McGrath 11:45–12:45 Session 4 Guest Presentations The fragility of formats Managing Information as Records Chair: Ludger Dinkler Tom Eccles (AIATSIS) Melany Laycock (AIATSIS) 12:45–1:30 Lunch 1:30–3:00 Session 5 Guest Presentations The information management journey of Gunditj Mirring The CDNTS Cultural Geography Database Developing a process for return of materials Chair: Mary Anne Jebb Damein Bell (Gunditj Mirring AC) Claire Greer (CDNTS) Margaret Rose (NWAC), Olivia Norris and Sanna Nalder (YMAC) 3:00–3:30 Afternoon tea 3:30–4:30 Session 6 Guest Presentations Later use and control of evidence given in native title hearings Chair: Lisa Strelein Angus Frith (Barrister)
Similarly with the information structure; it is no good imposing a structure that is counter intuitive and unlikely to be adopted if it doesn’t meet a variety of business needs. Also consider how people want to store their information—in a share drive, multiple folders can be created which ends up in a ridiculously long file path; this is less likely to work in an EDRMS as it will still be difficult to find information if buried 17 folders deep. Consider having a function/activity/ subject set of folders under the file, and maybe one or two other folders. If it the reasons for these restrictions are explained, staff can generally manage to fit all of their records into a more restrictive structure by putting some information in the file and folder titles. Duplicate records should be removed prior to migrating content to an EDRMS—this becomes harder to remove in an electronic environment when everyone is using the system. Whichever option is chosen, it is imperative that the system implementation is properly managed and is successful the first time round. Piloting of the system is recommended with as wide a group of people as possible and representatives should be taken from each work area. Targeting particular business or work groups to participate in a pilot can be a valuable way of obtaining champions for an EDRMS who may then be willing to take an ongoing role as a power user. Piloting of the system prior to implementation will allow you to: Test functionality on individual platforms and in real life situations; Iron out any technical bugs, and fix them before rollout; Add any functionality that hadn’t previously been considered; Make any important changes prior to rollout; Test the readiness of the agency for the EDRMS, and identify areas needing improvement. The main options for rolling out an are: Rolling out the EDRMS to everyone in the agency in one go; A phased approach, the EDRMS is rolled out to different work areas or groups of staff over time; A combined approach, where limited functionality (e.g. integration with desktop applications) is delivered to everyone at the same time, and additional functionality (such as integration with email) is rolled out in a phased approach. Implementing an interim solution like cleaning up documents/records on a shared or network drive which mirrors the proposed structure in the EDRMS, and then migrating the information to the EDRMS when it is implemented.