Search results

This paper aims to examine the concept of standardization beyond its traditional use in generating and implementing standards and good practice guidelines (S&GPG) by looking at existing and emerging trends.

This paper utilizes two primary approaches to categorizing S&GPG for better comprehension: categorization based on provenance as well as based on subject matter.

A significant concern related to categorizing S&GPG based on provenance or subject is the constant proliferation of standards being developed and introduced every year. This rapid growth in standards requires frequent re-categorization to keep up with the dynamic nature of this field. To tackle this problem, this paper explores emerging concepts such as ontological representation and frameworks that offer archives and records management (ARM) professionals.

Standardization refers to establishing uniform rules through mutual agreement to ensure consistency. The study of standardization goes beyond the development of individual S&GPG, encompassing their practical application in work settings. Categorizing standards alone may not fully capture their actual use. However, abstraction mechanisms like ontological representations, models and frameworks can demonstrate how these standards have been leveraged. This paper provides illustrative examples rather than an exhaustive list to showcase how these mechanisms have been applied in research projects or as practical tools.

This paper explores the emerging topic of standardization from the perspective of ontological representations and models or frameworks. In addition, it also contributes to the discussion of the 2022 version of ARMA International’s Information Governance Implementation Model and the 2020 version of the World Bank Group's Records Management Roadmap, providing unique insights into these topics.

The advancement of a profession depends on factors such as firm education, training programmes and vibrant professional associations. The purpose of this study is to provide baseline information on archives and records management (ARM) professionals from Africa, including their views on education and training programmes. Related studies have been limited to investigating the experiences of graduates from a few institutions within a limited jurisdiction. Similar studies have not been conducted by African-based ARM associations.

This study’s survey approach was administered electronically. Two surveys explored themes through 10 research questions in three categories: background information; characteristics of the education; and types of courses and extent covered during the study.

The two surveys had 107 and 179 respondents, respectively, domiciled in 19 African countries. In both studies, about 75% of the respondents had an undergraduate- or master-level qualification. Between 69% and 87% of the respondents from the first and second surveys, respectively, had completed their educational programmes within their home countries. There was varied sentiment on the types of courses and level of coverage within their studies. Legal and technology aspects were less covered in the curriculum than core subjects.

To the best of the author’s knowledge, this study is the first with findings from ARM respondents across several African countries. It provides insight into the demographics and educational programmes. This study’s unique contribution provides baseline data for more detailed and nuanced studies that will explore data and investigate patterns within and among individual countries on the continent.