Search results

Provides a review of the main features of the software available in the market that deal with retention management. Reviews a range of recently published works discussing retention management features and establishes a list of criteria. Reviews the most important and widely available software tools for retention management against these features and makes a comparison. Provides information about each how each criterion is satisfied by the reviewed tools and gives an overview on how the industry approaches retention management. Reveals that the list of the reviewed software is not exhaustive; also, the evaluation could have included more information on the tools and examples of how they can actually be used. Maintains, however, that this is a very useful source of information and impartial advice for everyone interested in retention management. Especially useful is the discussion on the future issues identified. Fulfils an identified information need for a discussion on how existing systems deal with retention management and offers help to an individual who wants to carry out research in this area.

To provide guidance to investment companies on document retention policies based on Section 802 of the Sarbanes‐Oxley Act of 2002, codified as Section 1519 of the United States Code.

Reviews the conviction of Arthur Andersen for obstruction of justice based on the way the firm implemented its document retention/destruction policy as Enron was collapsing, and the Supreme Court reversal of that conviction. Explains why the Supreme Court decision should no longer guide an investment company's document retention/destruction policy in light of more recently enacted Section 1519, which imposes stiff penalties on anyone who knowingly alters, destroys, mutilates, conceals, or covers up any record or document with the intent to impede, obstruct, or influence any federal investigation, or in contemplation of such a proceeding.

Suggests a few straightforward rules for an investment company's document retention/destruction policy with a warning to err on the side of caution.

In light of Section 1519, every investment company needs to review its document retention/destruction policy. This article provides useful guidelines for doing so.

Customer retention has been a significant topic since the mid‐1990s, but little research has been conducted into management processes that are associated with excellent customer retention performance. This research investigates the associations between customer retention outcomes and a number of management processes including customer retention planning, budgeting and accountability and the presence of a documented complaints‐handling process.

This is carried out using a quantitative survey of 170 companies in Australia. Participants represented all major standard industrial classification (SIC) codes.

It was found that excellence at customer retention is positively and significantly associated with the presence of documented complaints‐handling processes. None of the other variables is significantly associated with the dependent variable.

This research has limited generalisability to other regions and the self‐report nature of the data is not independently corroborated.

The research emphasises the importance of developing and implementing documented complaints‐handling processes. Future research should examine whether standardised processes such as those embodied in ISO 10002 are more effective than ad hoc processes.

The major contribution of this paper is the clear link that it establishes between customer retention performance and the presence of a documented complaints‐handling process.

The purpose of this paper is to examine the myriad ways record‐keeping can affect the course and outcome of products liability litigation. The examination includes an overview of the civil jury system in the USA, as well as an analysis of the benefits gained from instituting quality concepts and principles regarding the creation, management, storage and protection of quality‐related documents. Frequently the “star witness” in a products liability lawsuit is not a witness at all – it is a document. The written record a company generates plays a critical role in presenting a case to the jury in the event of litigation. With regard to retaining and storing company records, serious legal problems arise when documents are lost, damaged or destroyed without adequate explanation. Accordingly, embracing and implementing quality concepts and principles with regard to record‐keeping provides numerous rewards in the event of litigation.

The paper aims to discuss the growing importance of electronic discovery in commercial litigation; the impact of the e‐discovery amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP), and the steps corporations should take to address the new rules.

The paper reviews the impact of corporate reliance on electronic information on litigation; regulations that require corporations to protect data; significant cases that established ground rules for discovery of electronic information, including McPeek v. Aschcroft and Zubulake v. Warburg; the requirements of the e‐discovery rules that have been included for the first time in the FRCP; and outlines the steps that corporations should take to mitigate corporate e‐discovery risks.

The paper concludes that electronic discovery challenges will continue to grow for corporations as e‐discovery becomes increasingly important in commercial litigation; that companies can mitigate their e‐discovery risks by proactively working to meet the new requirements; that forward‐looking companies can gain important “safe harbor” protection by instituting a reliable litigation hold strategy; and that companies can use the new federal rules as an opportunity to better manage and forecast their legal costs.

The paper provides a general review of significant e‐discovery rulings; an explanation of the impact of the amended FRCP on corporations; and practical steps that companies can take to mitigate e‐discovery risks.

Working as a consultant really gives you the opportunity to travel. This week, the office of an oil company … the next, an office in the water industry … and the following week, still more variety—an office in the finance sector. Now capable of writing a thesis on the correlation between wallpapers and SIC codes, we turn our attention to the records held by each industry sector, and the way in which those records are managed. The practice of records management varies considerably from industry to industry and, within industry sectors, from company to company. So the oil industry tends to practice records management in a different way from the water industry or the finance industry. Certainly the oil industry faces particular problems in the range of media which it is required to handle, including well logs, seismic data, oil samples, as well as the inevitable quantities of paper and paper substitutes which all industries face. But not only does records management vary from industry to industry, it also varies from company to company—and so individual companies active within the oil industry operate a variety of records management procedures. A company's records management programme may include a number of elements—and I should like to review the most important of these before looking at the potential for standardisation in record management practices. The major elements within a records management programme may include the following:

WHhat records do we keep for business purposes? In my opinion, far too many. If we re‐phrase the question, what records should we keep for business purposes, I am confident that the answer is, or should be, as few as possible. Alas, this precept is not generally followed in industry, with the result that a great deal of space which could be more productively employed is wasted, and much unnecessary labour is expended on the maintenance of records which are not essential to business.

The purpose of this paper is to present the findings of the baseline study on the state of digital heritage material preservation in Botswana.

The study was part of a three‐country United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) Digital Heritage Preservation Project on the state of digital material preservation in Africa involving Botswana, Ethiopia and South Africa. The study uses the survey method consisting of various components data collection strategies including field work, document research, observations and the holding of a national consultative seminar an additional data input tool. The field study involved visiting 26 institutions that were identified as having the actual or potential of managing heritage materials in the country. Two other categories of institutions that were surveyed included the service providers of digitisation systems in the country.

Findings revealed weak policy formulation on digitization both at the institutional and national levels; weak legislative framework for digital preservation; ill‐defined national digitisation co‐ordination for digitisation activities at institutional, national and regional levels; lack of awareness about the potential of digital preservation by national heritage institutions; a dearth of human resources for digitization; and lack of common standards on digital heritage materials preservation in Botswana.

Although the study was limited to institutions dealing with digital heritage materials preservation, the outcome of the study sheds more light on the challenges of preservation of digital materials in most of the institutions in Botswana.

The results of this study presents useful strategic policy options for the management and preservation of digital materials in Botswana and other countries of Africa facing a similar environment.

There is a dearth of literature on preservation of digital heritage materials in Africa, and this study provides useful insights that are unique and comparative experiences that exist on this subject.

It is well known that the pharmaceutical industry produces enormous amounts of documentation for research, development and commercial purposes, some of it governed by legislation, other parts not. This paper attempts to summarise how one particular company, Glaxo Group Research Ltd., (GGR), meets the legislative requirements with respect to scientific documentation and how it is endeavouring to organise its documentation to meet the current and future needs of its users.

This paper proposes a framework for determining the potential benefits to be obtained from electronic document management systems as part of an integrated records management strategy.