The Electronic LibraryE‐government and records management: an assessment tool for e‐records readiness ingovernmentNathan Mnjama Justus Wamukoya

Article information:To cite this document:Nathan Mnjama Justus Wamukoya, (2007),"E#government and records management: an assessment toolfor e#records readiness in government", The Electronic Library, Vol. 25 Iss 3 pp. 274 - 284Permanent link to this document:http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/02640470710754797

Downloaded on: 10 October 2014, At: 01:17 (PT)References: this document contains references to 13 other documents.To copy this document: permissions@emeraldinsight.comThe fulltext of this document has been downloaded 3659 times since 2007*

Users who downloaded this article also downloaded:Gary P. Johnston, David V. Bowen, (2005),"The benefits of electronic records management systems: ageneral review of published and some unpublished cases", Records Management Journal, Vol. 15 Iss 3 pp.131-140Alistair Tough, Henry N. Kemoni, (2009),"Management of electronic records: Review of empirical studiesfrom the Eastern, Southern Africa Regional Branch of the International Council on Archives (ESARBICA)region", Records Management Journal, Vol. 19 Iss 3 pp. 190-203Anastasia Dikopoulou, Athanassios Mihiotis, (2012),"The contribution of records management to goodgovernance", The TQM Journal, Vol. 24 Iss 2 pp. 123-141

Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by 405406 []

For AuthorsIf you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald forAuthors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelinesare available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.

About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.comEmerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The companymanages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well asproviding an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.

Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committeeon Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archivepreservation.

*Related content and download information correct at time of download.

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

E-government and recordsmanagement: an assessment tool

for e-records readiness ingovernment

Nathan Mnjama and Justus WamukoyaDepartment of Library and Information Studies, University of Botswana,

Gaborone, Botswana

Abstract

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to indicate that, with the proliferation of informationcommunication technologies (ICT), electronic records are being generated in many public sectororganisations in Africa, which has resulted in many challenges hitherto never experienced byarchivists and records managers.

Design/methodology/approach – The paper reviews literature on ICT, records management ande-governance and the challenges faced by archivists and records managers particularly in developingcountries as they deal with records generated by ICT.

Findings – The paper shows that, while many governments have systems and procedures formanaging paper-based records, the same cannot be said for electronic records and other digital images.

Practical implications – The paper demonstrates that, without proper planning and adoption ofvarious methods, e-records created using modern ICT are likely to become inaccessible in the future,thus compromising the ability to remain accountable to the citizens.

Originality/value – The paper shows that, while various e-records readiness tools are available inthe West, none of them addresses e-records readiness issues in Africa where systems and proceduresfor managing records both paper and electronic are inadequate. The article provides a simple tool forassessing a country’s e-readiness for the adoption of e-records in an e-government environment.

Keywords Records management, Electronic document delivery, Government, Assessment, Aftrica

Paper type Literature review

IntroductionAn increasing number of governments all over the world are adopting moderninformation communication technologies (ICT) as a tool for providing effective andefficient services to their citizens. As a corollary to this, there has been a shift in themanner of how information is collected, processed, stored and disseminated. However,the adoption of these modern ICTs in managing records has often been haphazardwithout due consideration on the impact they have in such management. This articlebegins by examining the role of e-records as a tool for government, assesses thechallenges of managing e-records and develops a simple tool for assessing e-recordsreadiness within an e-government environment. It argues that to assess whether agovernment is ready for e-records, it must examine, among many things, the legal andregulatory framework, the physical infrastructure, procedures for collecting,processing, storing and disseminating e-records, the staffing and training levels andissues relating to the long-term storage and accessibility of e-records.

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at

www.emeraldinsight.com/0264-0473.htm

EL25,3

274

Received 12 January 2006Revised 5 October 2006Accepted 13 October 2006

The Electronic LibraryVol. 25 No. 3, 2007pp. 274-284q Emerald Group Publishing Limited0264-0473DOI 10.1108/02640470710754797

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Records and good governanceLipchak (2002, p. 6), an independent information consultant, based in Toronto, Canada,argues that “good governance based on transparency, accountability and trust (andsimilar values) has become a shared goal among governments around the world.” Hegoes on to say, however, that achieving this goal requires a common approach to theestablishment of recordkeeping programs – programs that enable and supporteffective democratic governance. He stresses the fact that there is a need “to explore therelationship between information management and good governance and to identifykey issues which governments in both developed and developing countries shouldconsider in assessing and improving their recordkeeping (or records management)programs”. Lipchak further argues that the need to explore these issues stems from thefact that:

. The nature and form of governance is changing as a result of many factors, mostnotably, the rise of new technologies and their growing incorporation intocorporate business environments, public as well as private.

. Good recordkeeping underpins good governance, especially in an increasinglyinformation and technology-intensive environment in which ICTs have a majorimpact on the availability, processing, storage, distribution and security ofinformation.

. A learning culture and strong infrastructure of laws, policies, standards,practices, systems and resources are required to support informationmanagement in both traditional and e-government environments.

. The creation, use and preservation of e-records pose special challenges requiringnew techniques and tools that are informed by traditional informationmanagement principles and goals.

Lowell (1987, pp. 3-4) an Australian records expert believes that “Government recordshave a unique character that imposes special responsibilities on the agencies thatpreserve and manage them”. He goes on further to say that “the value of state recordsderives from information they contain and evidence they provide. State records notonly document past decisions, they often establish and protect current rights andresponsibilities of both the government and the governed.” He concludes that “recordsprovide a source of public accountability of how elected officials and the bureaucracyhave carried out their public trust and the mandates of the citizenry.”

Perhaps the best summary of the usefulness of records is that which is provided byPiggot (2002) a senior information solutions consultant with the Word Bank who saysthat “without access to good records, officials are forced to take decisions on an ad hocbasis without the benefit of institutional memory. Fraud cannot be proven, meaningfulaudits cannot be carried out and government actions are not open to review”. There areseveral reasons in the context of good governance why governments need to manageand maintain records properly. According to Piggot, these reasons are:

. Governments rely on legislative records, court records, police and prison recordsto preserve the rule of law.

. Government relies upon policy files, budget papers, accounting records,procurement records, personnel records, tax records, election registers, propertyand fixed asset registers to demonstrate accountability to its citizens.

E-governmentand records

management

275

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

. The protection of entitlements depends on pension records, social securityrecords, land records, birth and death records.

. In providing services to citizens, a government needs hospital records, schoolrecords, and environmental protection monitoring records.

. In documenting its relationship with other countries, government has tomaintain foreign relations and international obligations treaties, correspondencewith national and international bodies, loan agreements, etc.

. Without adequate records, the effectiveness of development projects cannot beascertained. Moreover, there is no way of verifying that the development projectsfall within acceptable legal, financial and cultural boundaries of a clientgovernment or that funds for development are used as intended.

. Lack of records management is directly linked to the persistence of corruption andfraud. Experts in financial management control recognise and acknowledge thefact that well managed records systems are vital to the success of mostanti-corruption strategies. Records provide verifiable evidence to fraud that canlead investigators to the root of corruption. Well-managed records can act as a costeffective restraint. On the whole prevention is much cheaper than prosecution.

. The loss of control of records has consequences for all citizens, especially for thepoorest who are least able to defend themselves. Relevant, accurate and completepublic records must exist if governments are to preserve the rule of law and todemonstrate fair, equal, and consistent treatment of citizens.

E-governmentIncreasingly governments all over the world are adopting information communicationtechnologies to carry out their activities and operation resulting in what we may calltoday e-government. The World Bank (2004, p. 1) defines e-government as:

[. . .] the use by government agencies of information technologies (such as Wide AreaNetworks, the Internet, and mobile computing) that have the ability to transform relationswith citizens, businesses, and other arms of government.

The World Bank (2004, p. 1) goes on to state that:

[. . .] these technologies can serve a variety of different ends: better delivery of governmentservices to citizens, improved interactions with business and industry, citizen empowermentthrough access to information, or more efficient government management. The resultingbenefits can be less corruption, increased transparency, greater convenience, revenue growth,and/or cost reductions.

A similar definition on e-government has been provided by the Centre for Technologyin Government (2004, p. 1) which views e-government as:

[. . .] the use of information technology to support government operations, engage citizens,and provide government services.

The Centre for Technology in Government notes that e-government encompasses fourkey functions of the government, namely:

(1) E-services. The electronic delivery of government information, programs, andservices often (but not exclusively) over the internet.

EL25,3

276

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

(2) E-democracy. The use of electronic communications to increase citizenparticipation in the public decision-making process.

(3) E-commerce. The electronic exchange of money for goods and services such ascitizens paying taxes and utility bills, renewing vehicle registrations, andpaying for recreation programs, or government buying supplies and auctioningsurplus equipment.

(4) E-management. The use of information technology to improve the managementof government, from streamlining business processes to maintaining e-records,to improving the flow and integration of information.

The challenges of managing e-recordsAs discussed above, the emergence of e-government has resulted in the creation ofe-records and the information they contain is indeed a valuable asset that must bemanaged and protected. Besides providing essential evidence of organisationalactivities, transactions and decisions, e-records also support business functions and arecritical for the assessment of organisational performance. Without reliable e-recordsgovernments cannot manage state resources, its revenue or civil service. It cannotdeliver services such as education and healthcare. Moreover, without accurate andreliable e-records and an effective system to manage them, governments cannot be heldaccountable for their decisions and actions and the rights and obligations of citizensand corporate bodies cannot be upheld.

New technologies provide great potential for improving efficiency and provision ofservices, but e-records, as the evidence base upon which governments depend, mustcontinue to be protected and preserved. For initiatives such as e-government ande-commerce to be successful, governments must have access to information thatpossesses certain crucial characteristics: accuracy, relevancy, authoritativeness,completeness, authenticity and security.

The emergence and growing importance of e-records as a means of communicatingand preserving corporate information poses new challenges hitherto unknown toadministrators and records managers, and unless these challenges are addressednations stand to lose valuable information. Whereas the essential characteristics ofpaper records – content, structure and context – are clearly evident, this is not the casewith e-records. For paper records all these elements reside in the same physicalmedium. In designing an e-records management system the goal should therefore be toensure the following essential characteristics:

(1) Comprehensiveness. Whatever method or system is used to create an electronicrecord, the created records should be able to show who, what, where, when,why, with whom and so on was involved in the transaction. All governmenttransactions should be captured and stored in the institution’s records-keepingsystem. Ideally, the e-records management system should answer the followingquestions:. Why was the record created?. Who created, received and kept the record?. What functions does it serve?. What procedures, methods, and processes were used to create, send and

maintain the record?

E-governmentand records

management

277

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

(2) Authenticity. For e-records to remain authentic and a true reflection of theactivities and transactions that have been carried out, authorisations for accessto data or parts of it must be recorded and must be traceable. An audit trailshowing what was sent, to whom, who saw it, received it, deleted or amended itshould be available. Just like in paper records, this aspect must be ensured inelectronic environments.

(3) Fixity. E-records should be tamper proof. Once a transaction has occurred, noalteration should be made to the record. Any change to this must be recordedand linked to the first. This will ensure accuracy, reliability and authenticity ofthe e-record.

E-records management assessment toolAs indicated above the proliferation of e-records has introduced many challenges toarchivists and records managers many of whom are unaware of the numerous issuespertaining to the creation, storage and retrieval and dissemination of e-records. Thequestion that needs to be addressed is here is whether there are any standardised toolsfor assessing e-readiness in government.

A survey of available literature indicates that there is no single accepted definitionof e-readiness. However, there is common agreement in the literature reviewed thate-readiness assessment tools may be divided into two main categories: those that focuson assessing the basic infrastructure or a nation’s readiness for business or economicgrowth; and those that focus on assessing the ability of the country to benefit fromICTs. Specifically, Bridges.org (2001) suggest that most assessments are focused onassessing:

. physical infrastructure (telephone, electricity etc) with high bandwidth, reliable,and affordable;

. high-speed access to ICT in government, healthcare facilities and homes;

. integration and use of ICT in everyday life;

. existence of government policies that support and promote connectedness;

. existence of legislative and regulatory framework;

. provision of adequate information communication channels;

. guaranteed user privacy and online security;

. universal access – technologies which are accessible and usable by all citizensincluding the very young and the elderly, and people with different disabilities;and

. e-records readiness – freedom of access to information, conformance existinglaws, skills and competencies, disaster preparedness, retention and disposalstrategies.

A number of standards have been developed which make specific reference to recordsmanagement requirements. These include ISO15489/1 (2002), which defines the basicrequirements for the management of records regardless of the format. It also analysesrecords management processes in terms of the life cycle. Others are the Nationalarchives of Canada Information Capacity Check Model (IMCC) and the EuropeanCommission Model for the Management of E-records (MoReq).

EL25,3

278

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

This particular section examines e-readiness in managing e-records withparticular emphasis to African governments where resources and facilities arerather limited. It is crucial that the management of e-records must be supported byclear policies, procedures and guidelines if they are to retain their evidential valuesthat are needed for accountable and transparent governance.

Studies conducted by the International Records Management Trust (IRMT) (2003,p. 5) a charitable organisation based in the UK has revealed various impediments to themanagement of both paper and e-records as follows:

. absence of organisational plans for managing e-records;

. low awareness of the role of records management in supporting organisationalefficiency and accountability;

. lack of stewardship and co-ordination in handling paper-based as well ase-records;

. absence of legislation, organisational policies and procedures to guide themanagement of both paper and e-records;

. absence of core competencies in records and archives management;

. lack of appropriate facilities and environmental conditions for the storage andpreservation of paper as well as e-records;

. absence of dedicated budgets for records management;

. poor security and confidentiality controls;

. lack of records retention and disposal policies;

. absence of migration strategies for e-records; and

. absence of vital records and disaster preparedness and recovery plans.

To address the above issues, IRMT and the World Bank initiated a programme in 2003with the aim of developing an assessment tool that will assist governmentalorganisations and other agencies to assess their e-records readiness againstinternationally accepted standards. The IRMT (2004) e-records readiness tool isintended to provide a benchmark for organisations to assess themselves and todetermine where they stand relative to the above issues. It is also intended to provideinformation to assist organisations to develop plans and strategies aimed at improvingboth their paper-based and e-records environments (see the Appendix). Specifically, thetool addresses the following issues:

. awareness and ownership;

. ICT – records management integration;

. laws, policies, and procedures;

. resources and training;

. records management program management; and

. long-term preservation and accessibility.

Awareness and ownership

This has to do with the extent to which senior management are aware, understand, anddemonstrate commitment to a clear vision and set of objectives for the management of

E-governmentand records

management

279

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

both paper and e-records. The level of awareness and commitment can be used togauge where an organisation is placed in terms of records management readiness on ascale of 1-5 as follows:

(1) Level 1. Senior management have no understanding of and commitment to themanagement of the organisation’s records.

(2) Level 2. Senior management have a broad understanding of and recognise theneed to embrace and support records management in the organisation.

(3) Level 3. Senior management are highly committed to and are supportive ofrecords management programmes in the organisation.

(4) Level 4. Senior management have created an environment whereby recordsmanagement is highly valued as part of the organisation’s overall informationmanagement strategy.

(5) Level 5. The organisation is recognised for its stewardship and leadership rolein implementing records management programmes.

ICT – records management integrationOngoing research has demonstrated the nexus between the state of paper-basedrecords systems and the success or failure of automation projects as evident infinancial and personnel management information systems initiated in a number ofAfrican countries including Ghana and Tanzania. In many cases filing systems areunreliable and inconsistent, resulting in poor information capture and access.

One of the important lessons learned is that automated systems cannot simply besuper-imposed on dysfunctional or chaotic paper systems as this has often been arecipe for failure in many countries. Given that many African governments havelargely operated in a paper-based environment for a very long time, the change processfrom paper to electronic systems is bound to be more complex than is often realised.One is the need to fix the paper mess before contemplating to automate. Two, when adecision is reached to automate there is the necessity to maintain some sort of hybridsystem which allows for parallel or complimentary paper and electronic systems toco-exist for a period of time. Three, is the need to allow for gradual integration of themanual/paper system with the computerised system by focusing on specific productsthat support the business process. Four, is the consolidation of the computerisedsystem by focusing on e-records legislation, policies, systems, procedures, standardsand resources. The level of integration between paper-based systems and electronicsystems should therefore be assessed adequately.

Laws, policies and proceduresThe level of commitment to managing e-records can be gauged by the existence ornon-existence of such things as existence of records management policies andprocedures. However, the mere existence of a law or policy is not enough evidence thatthe organisation is committed to managing its e-records. Griffin (2003) has observedthat in many governments, policies and guidance for managing the records ofgovernment are often non-existent and the legislative and regulatory framework isoften weak or out-dated. In some countries the responsibility for managing theinformation on which government and citizens depend is often not properly assignedor is unclear. It is also important to note that the existence of a records management

EL25,3

280

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

policy that does not embrace all forms of records and particularly electronic and digitalrecords is inadequate. In assessing laws, policies and procedures, it is of vitalimportance to examine whether the government accepts electronic records as evidence.A recent electronic discussion jointly commissioned by the IRMT and the World Bank(2002) involving participants from across the Commonwealth revealed that while manyCommonwealth governments had developed strategies for ICT development andelectronic government, very few had come up with laws, policies, systems, standardsand procedures for managing e-records. The participants therefore urged governmentsto take appropriate steps to address these issues.

In other words, as part of the e-government strategy governments should strive notonly to establish records management legislation, policies and procedures across thepublic service but also to integrate these with all business functions as a means ofsupporting organisational accountability and governance.

Resources and trainingKey resources such as trained staff, equipment, basic supplies and money, are often notmade available and little effort is made to provide them. With few or non-existenttrained and qualified staff in records management, and the low status accorded torecords work, the principles and standards that should guide records and informationwork are never included as part of organisation’s strategic plans. Availability oftrained personnel and resources therefore becomes an assessable area in determining acountry’s e-readiness.

Records management programme managementThe quality of record keeping systems continues to be a major weakness of manyAfrican governments in spite of the relationship that exists between recordsmanagement and public sector management. The effective and systematic creation,distribution, maintenance, use and disposal of records regardless of the format inwhich they are held is testimony to a government’s ability to reflect the values andethics that are often associated with good governance i.e. transparency, accountability,public trust, protection of rights and entitlements, citizen engagement, service, etc.Unfortunately as indicated elsewhere in this paper, the state of records management inmany of these countries leaves much to be desired. There is urgent need to developrecords management programmes that not only address the traditional aspects ofmanaging paper records, but also which to a large extent address the new challengesposed by e-records. Such records management programmes must be supported bywell-defined policies and procedures, trained personnel and well-equipped storagefacilities.

Long-term storage accessibility of e-recordsThe collection, processing and storage of e-records would be useless if procedures andmechanisms are not in place for ensuring their long term preservation and accessibilityby the citizens who need these records. A special report by Kahn Consulting (2004, p. 7)argues that retention is useless without accessibility. The report further states that“capturing, indexing and storing digital content serves little purpose if it is not readilyaccessible when required. Too often organisations implement systems that may

E-governmentand records

management

281

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

improve business process but hamper the accessibility of significant business content,a fact that courts and regulators may be unwilling to overlook.”

The New York State Office of Technology (2002) argues that for e-records“accessibility includes having the technical means and metadata (data describing how,when, and by whom an e-record was created, and how it is formatted) to access, use, andunderstand the records.” E-records should not only be accessible to government officials,but provision should be made for such records to be accessible to the public (immediatelywhere freedom of access to information exists) at the expiry of approved closed periods.It cannot be over-emphasised that e-records just like paper records have to be retained forlong periods as evidence of government transactions. If these records are not capturedthe consequence is that future generations will have no record of government activitiesor decisions resulting in loss of accountability and societal memory.

In assessing e-readiness in government, two issues need to be critically examined.These relate to the integrity, security, authenticity and accessibility of e-records. Ane-record is considered to have integrity if it can be proved that its contents have notbeen altered in any way from its time of creation up to the time of ultimate disposition.Moreover, the trustworthiness of an e-record depends on establishing that it has beenstored in a secure environment. In establishing the authenticity of a e-recordmechanisms must be in place to assess that the e-record is in fact what it purports to be.This demands the ability to determine who created and handled the record at anygiven moment. In simple terms, in assessing the authenticity of e-records there must beprocedures for providing an audit trail of the e-record from the time of its creation tothe time of its ultimate disposal.

ConclusionThis paper has discussed the important role played by e-records in government due tothe proliferation of information communication technologies. Although governmenthave systems and procedures for managing paper based records, the same cannot besaid for electronic records and other digital information. While various e-recordsreadiness tools are available in fully developed nations, systems and procedures formanaging not only electronic, but also paper records are inadequate in Africancountries. The laws, policies and procures that are necessary for successfulimplementation of an e-records programme that supports e-government must becritically examined and the article provides a simple tool for assessing a country’se-readiness for the adoption of e-records in an e-government environment.

In conclusion it can be argued that there is every reason for African governments tore-assess their e-records readiness using the checklist provided in this paper as theymove towards implementing e-government initiatives. Failure to do so may lead to theloss of valuable data and information which is not only needed for planning anddevelopment purposes, but also as a permanent record of the successes and failures ofthese nations.

References

Bridges.org (2001), “Comparison of readiness assessment models: final draft, v. 2.13”, availableat: www.bridges.org/ereadiness/tools.html

Centre for Technology in Government (2004), “A working definition of e-government”, availableat: www.ctg.albany.edu/publications/reports/future_of_egov?chapter¼2

EL25,3

282

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

Griffin, A. (2003), “Managing records in the electronic age”, unpublished, IMRT, London.

International Records Management Trust (IRMT) (2003), E-records Readiness: EstablishingE-records as a Component of Electronic Government. A Proposal, IRMT, London.

International Records Management Trust (IRMT) (2004), The E-records Readiness Tool, IRMT,London.

International Records Management Trust and the World Bank (2002), Resolutions of the EvidenceBased Government in the Electronic Age Workshop, Johannesburg, 13-26 September.

Kahn Consulting (2004), “Records management redefined: from the backroom to the boardroom:managing business content to improve business efficiency and accountability”, availableat: www.kahnconsultinginc.com/library/KCIWhitepaper-RecordsManagementRedefined-Legato.pdf

Lipchak, A. (2002), “Information management to support evidence-based government in theelectronic age: a public policy forum discussion paper”, available at: www.ppforum.ca/ow/ow_p_11_2002B_es.pdf

Lowell, H.P. (1987), “Elements of a state archives and records management programme”, RecordsManagement Quarterly, Vol. 21, October, pp. 3-14.

New York State Office of Technology (2002), “E-commerce/e-government in New York State:glossary”, available at: www.oft.state.ny.us/esra/Guidelines_files/ESRAGuidelines5.htm

Piggot, S. (2002), “Evidence based governance in the electronic age”, paper presented at the 32ndAnnual Conference of the Association of Caribbean University Research and InstitutionalLibraries, Jamaica, 22 May-1 June.

World Bank (2004), “A definition of e-government”, available at: www1.worldbank.org/publicsector/egov/definition.htm

Further reading

Khan, R. and Blair, B.T. (2004), “The law and technology of trustworthy electronic records:considerations for the securities industry”, available at: www.kahnconsultinginc.com/library/KCI-Whitepaper-E-Records-Law-Technology.pdf

Appendix. E-government: the need for e-records assessment toolThe questions posed below are not exhaustive but provide some guidance on areas to beexamined when assessing e-records readiness:

(1) Is there a law(s) governing the management of public sector e-records?

(2) If no law(s) exists for managing e-records are there any policies, regulations orprocedures developed for the management of e-records?

(3) Do these policies, regulations or procedures cover the entire life cycle of the e-records?

(4) Is there any government institution charged with the responsibility of managinge-records?

(5) Is this institution responsible for the formulation of government-wide policies andprocedures for managing e-records?

(6) Do government-wide procedure manuals exist for managing e-records?

(7) Does the e-records management manual if it exists:(a) Identify and assign responsibilities on who manages e-records?(b) Have step by step procedures for managing each stage of the life cycle of e-records?(c) Indicate the retention periods for each type of e-record?

E-governmentand records

management

283

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

(d) Contain arrangements for selection and preservation of permanent e-records?(e) Provide guidelines on issues relating to access of e-records?

(8) How often are these procedures manuals reviewed in order to comply with technologicaldevelopments?

(9) Are there any linkages between the e-records programme and the paper-based recordsmanagement programme?

(10) How are e-records captured and classified?

(11) Is there a system in place for tracking changes made on the e-record?

(12) Do procedures exist for regular transfer of e-records from current to semi-current ornon-current storage?

(13) Is there an established system for the review and disposal of e-records no longer requiredby the organisation?

(14) Are the staff adequately trained to manage e-records?

(15) How often is the e-records programme audited for compliance with local, regional orinternational best practice?

(16) Are there adequate facilities for the storage of e-records?

(17) Are there any disaster preparedness plans for e-records?

(18) Are regular backups made for all valuable e-records?

(19) Is there regular migration of information from one medium to another or from onesystem to another?

(20) Are these procedures for data migration documented?

(21) How is the system protected against authorised access?

About the authorsNathan Mnjama is a Senior Lecturer in Archives and Records Management at the Department ofLibrary and Information Studies, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana. Prior to this heworked as an archivist at the Kenya National Archives and as lecturer in archives and recordsmanagement at Moi University, Kenya. He has a PhD in archives and records management fromUniversity College London. He has participated in several archives and records managementinitiatives in East, West and Southern Africa. Nathan Mnjama is the corresponding author andcan be contacted at: mnjamanm@mopipi.ub.bw

Justus Wamukoya is a Senior Lecturer in Archives and Records Management at theDepartment of Library and Information Studies, University of Botswana, Gaborone, Botswana.He worked as a records manager with Kenya National Archives until 1989 when he moved toMoi University to work as a lecturer in records management. He holds a Masters and PhD inarchives and records management both obtained from University College London.

EL25,3

284

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.comOr visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)

This article has been cited by:

1. Chung Joo Chung, Seong Eun Cho, Han Woo Park. 2014. SNS use by the Korean government: a case ofMe2Day. Asian Journal of Communication 24:1, 25-41. [CrossRef]

2. References 229-257. [CrossRef]3. Eze Asogwa Brendan. 2013. The readiness of universities in managing electronic records. The Electronic

Library 31:6, 792-807. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]4. Hassan Behzadi, Alireza Isfandyari‐Moghaddam, Majideh Sanji. 2012. E‐government portals: a

knowledge management study. The Electronic Library 30:1, 89-102. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]5. Trywell Kalusopa, Patrick Ngulube. 2012. Record management practices in labour organisations in

Botswana. SA Journal of Information Management 14:1. . [CrossRef]6. Ozgur Kulcu. 2009. Evolution of e‐records management practices in e‐government. The Electronic Library

27:6, 999-1009. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]7. Guangwei Hu, Wenwen Pan, Mingxin Lu, Jie Wang. 2009. The widely shared definition of e‐Government.

The Electronic Library 27:6, 968-985. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]8. Jin-Hee Yim, Yong-Ho Jun. 2009. The Procedures and Methods for Selecting and Establishing Control

Criteria for Accountability Information. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management 26:3,145-168. [CrossRef]

9. Fang‐Ming Hsu, Tser‐Yieth Chen, Shuwen Wang. 2009. Efficiency and satisfaction of electronic recordsmanagement systems in e‐government in Taiwan. The Electronic Library 27:3, 461-473. [Abstract] [FullText] [PDF]

10. Jin-Hee Yim, Su-Young Woo. 2009. Enhancement of Universities' Accountability Mechanisms forFreedom of Information and Disclosure. Journal of the Korean Society for information Management 26:1,107-124. [CrossRef]

11. Staci M. ZavattaroRecords Management, Privacy, and Social Media 41-64. [CrossRef]12. Cathrine T. NengomashaLibrarians, Records Managers, and E-Government 1148-1164. [CrossRef]13. Cathrine T. NengomashaLibrarians, Records Managers, and E-Government 244-260. [CrossRef]14. Mahmud Akhter Shareef, Yogesh K. DwivediElectronic Government Adoption Paradigms 27-85.

[CrossRef]

Dow

nloa

ded

by U

NIV

ER

SIT

Y O

F SO

UT

HE

RN

QU

EE

NSL

AN

D A

t 01:

17 1

0 O

ctob

er 2

014

(PT

)