Chapter 4: The Values and relations with the Government and Parliament

Recordkeeping

The APS Values set out in the PS Act provide that the APS is openly accountable for its actions, within the framework of ministerial responsibility to the Government, the Parliament and the Australian people. The maintenance of effective recordkeeping systems supports this value, by allowing agencies to demonstrate that due process has been followed in actions and decisions. Effective recordkeeping is also integral to meeting legal requirements, and the achievement of business goals by ensuring that necessary corporate information is available and accessible as required.

Over the past few decades, recordkeeping in the APS has been influenced by an increase in public scrutiny through administrative law reform and parliamentary oversight, and increased emphasis on achieving results. Technology has also had a major impact on recordkeeping practices.

Although there has been an increase in the transparency of recordkeeping, a number of organisations have raised concerns about its quality and quantity. In September 2003, the ANAO tabled the second in a series of audits on recordkeeping.⁸ It concluded that, although all agencies audited had taken active steps to improve their recordkeeping frameworks and practices, their recordkeeping policies, systems and procedures were at different stages of development. In particular, it found a significant risk of the noncapture and unauthorised disposal of records because:

• organisations had not paid sufficient attention to the risks associated with recordkeeping, including those related to outsourced functions, nor had they identified their vital records
• not all records were being entered into formal recordkeeping systems
• limited controls were in place over electronic records
• formal, long-term sentencing programs for the disposal of records were not in place
• physical records were not being stored in compliance with NAA standards
• contracts with outsourced providers did not include all recordkeeping elements recommended by the NAA, and minimal monitoring and review activities were being conducted to ensure outsourced providers were meeting recordkeeping requirements.

The State of the Service Report 2001–02 reported that there was a growing awareness of modern recordkeeping requirements among agencies, but that some, particularly smaller agencies, were not well advanced in reviewing arrangements and integrating electronic records into corporate records management systems. It also reported a need for more active and targeted staff training and development strategies.

In response to the ANAO’s first audit report on recordkeeping⁹ and the State of the Service Report 2001–02, the NAA has included practical advice on its website explaining how agencies can use its products and services to address the identified issues.¹⁰ In June 2003, the NAA also released a training package, Keep the knowledge—Make a record! This package is designed to assist agency trainers or records staff to design agency-specific programs to teach staff about their recordkeeping responsibilities.

Recordkeeping was also referred to in the APS Commission’s publication APS Values and Code of Conduct in practice: Guide to official conduct for APS employees and agency heads, launched in August 2003. The guide outlines the importance of recordkeeping in the APS in the context of managing official information, and highlights key issues facing the APS including time constraints, use of personal records, accuracy and the impact of technology.

The agency survey asked questions about the review of recordkeeping systems in agencies and the use of measures to ensure staff are aware of their recordkeeping responsibilities. The employee survey explored employee perceptions of recordkeeping. This section also draws on the results of two surveys of recordkeeping conducted for the NAA in September 2002, which surveyed agencies and employees who create records.¹¹ In general, the findings point to increasing attention paid by agencies to the issue of modernising their recordkeeping systems. However, there is evidence that a more strategic approach to records management and training is required in some agencies.

The evolution of recordkeeping systems

Significant changes in technology in recent years have prompted APS agencies to modernise their recordkeeping systems. The extent of the modernisation has meant that, at this point in time, the APS remains in a state of transition in regard to recordkeeping, and agencies will continue to require a considerable investment in time and resources, and sustained effort, to ensure that their recordkeeping systems continue to meet changing needs.

The NAA’s agency survey painted a complex and diverse picture of current arrangements for recordkeeping in Commonwealth agencies. A centralised model of record management, with one policy, one physical location for the record management operation and one group of people responsible for record management activities was most common (used in 43% of agencies). However, decentralised models, with multiple units providing services for particular areas, were used by 12% of agencies, and devolved models, where records management staff report directly to business unit managers, were used by 9% of agencies. A combination model, with features of all three models, was the second most common response (used in 35% of agencies).

The results of the agency survey show that the majority of APS agencies (63%) undertook a review of their recordkeeping systems in 2002–03 and that a further 20% of agencies are planning to undertake a review in 2003–04. Large and medium agencies (68% and 69% respectively) were more likely to have conducted a review in 2002–03 than small agencies (56%) but small agencies were more likely than large agencies to be planning reviews in 2003–04 (29% compared with 9%).

A significant proportion of agencies are using the Designing and Implementing Recordkeeping Systems (DIRKS) methodology developed by the NAA in their reviews, with almost half (47%) of agencies reporting either commencing, continuing or finalising a DIRKS process in 2002–03. However, for all but three of these agencies, activity was limited to the preliminary stages of the DIRKS process, with the NAA reporting that much of the activity concentrated on the development of new functions-based disposal authorities.¹² There is, however, potential for agencies to apply the information about their business needs, collected through the functional analysis required by this process, to more fundamental reviews of their recordkeeping systems, including reviews of electronic recordkeeping.

The widespread use of electronic communication continues to be a major challenge for agencies.¹³ While the extent of review activity suggests agencies are actively responding to this challenge, the NAA’s agency survey identified continuing differences in the way paper and electronic records were handled in some agencies. For example, 68% of responding agencies reported that they had a current documented records management policy, and that almost all of these policies covered paper files. However, in only around twothirds of cases did such a policy also cover electronic mail and electronic documents.

Similar results were found in the NAA’s employee survey. While 91% of employee respondents reported that their agency had agency-wide systems and procedures for managing paper records, only 73% had similar procedures for electronic documents and electronic mail. Nevertheless, this latter finding represents an increase on the results of the NAA’s 2000 employee survey, which found that 67% of respondents said that there were agency-wide systems in place for capturing electronic information, and 57% said that there were agency-wide systems in place for capturing electronic mail.

While these results indicate that progress has been made in the electronic capture of records, agencies must continue to improve the quality of their systems for storing them. For example, the NAA employee survey found that the ease of filing electronic records was rated less favourably than the ease of filing paper records (with 27% of respondents rating the filing of electronic records as difficult compared with 17% for paper records).

The NAA also asked employees where they stored their work-related electronic files. Just under half of respondents (49%) reported that these files were located within their agency’s recordkeeping systems, suggesting that there is still a need for the filing of electronic records to be approached more systematically.

The Australian Government’s strategy Government Online required agencies to make and keep records that accurately document public websites over time.¹⁴ The standards for recordkeeping established in this strategy have been reaffirmed through the Australian Government’s e-government strategy, released in November 2002.¹⁵ The standards and guidelines for e-permanence that agencies must comply with are maintained by the NAA.

The NAA’s agency survey found that just over half of the agencies (54%) managed their web-based records in accordance with the NAA’s guidelines, with more medium and large agencies (69% and 58%) using the guidelines than small agencies (48%). The most common reasons provided by agencies which had not used the guidelines were that they were not yet ready to implement the guidelines or that implementation was pending, that they did not have sufficient resources, or that the guidelines were not necessary or relevant to their organisation.

Recordkeeping capability

The employee survey results show that most employees believe that their agencies place a priority on effective recordkeeping, with 84% of employees stating that their agency considers good recordkeeping practices to be very important. Employees from small agencies were less likely to agree with this statement (71%) than employees from medium (85%) and large agencies (84%). Agency-specific results available for 21 large agencies show that on an agency-by-agency basis results vary considerably, from 69% to 96%. The large agencies with the highest results were the CRS, Centrelink and Customs.

The employee survey found that a majority of employees agree that they receive appropriate training and/or have access to information that enables them to meet their recordkeeping responsibilities (64%). Nevertheless, this was substantially lower than the proportion of employees who agreed that their agency considered good recordkeeping practices to be very important (84%). This difference was also reflected in some additional comments made by employees. For example, one employee said:

Recordkeeping is a high priority within this agency but training for admin officers is sadly lacking.

There was again considerable variation among agencies. In particular, employees from small agencies were less likely to agree (49%) than employees from medium (69%) or large agencies (64%).

Aminority of employees (18%) indicated that they have not received appropriate training or had access to necessary information. This number was significantly higher for SES and EL employees (25% and 28% respectively) than for APS level employees (15%). This finding is consistent with findings from the NAA employee survey, where ELs and SES employees were less likely to rate training courses, intranet information and guidelines and policies as useful than APS employees. This issue of how best to influence senior officers’ recordkeeping behaviour is particularly significant, given the importance of the records that are likely to be created at these levels.

Agency survey results were generally consistent with the employee survey results. For example, only 62% of agencies have measures in place to ensure senior managers are aware of their recordkeeping responsibilities, but a further 29% of agencies are developing awareness-raising measures. Similarly, while 67% of agencies have measures in place to ensure non-SES employees are aware of their recordkeeping responsibilities, a further 28% of agencies are developing such measures.

The most common measures for ensuring senior managers were aware of their responsibilities were selfnominating formal in-house training (44% of agencies with measures or developing measures), followed by attendance at NAA seminars or training (43%), and inclusion in general training for senior staff (30%).¹⁶

Fifty-three per cent of agencies indicated they had measures additional to those specified for ensuring senior managers are aware of their recordkeeping responsibilities in the survey, with the most common being inclusion of guidelines on departmental intranets, induction training and staff newsletters or circulars. Results for other staff indicated a greater use of self-nominating training programs (59%) and a high use of circulars and operating instructions (79%).

There is currently no comparable data that allows us to assess trends over time in employee satisfaction with training and information relating to recordkeeping. However, the numerical data collected in the 2002–03 State of the Service employee survey will provide a benchmark for information collected in future years.

 

8 ANAO, Recordkeeping in Large Commonwealth Organisations, Report No. 7, September 2003, http://www.anao.gov.au

9 ANAO, Recordkeeping, Report No. 45, May 2002, http://www.anao.gov.au

10 NAA, Using e-permanence: Advice on addressing ANAO and APS Commission findings on recordkeeping, 2003, http://www.naa.gov.au

11 Orima Research and NAA, Report on a survey of the state of recordkeeping in the Commonwealth Government, 2002, http://www.naa.gov.au. This survey was sent to all Commonwealth agencies covered by the Archives Act 1983, including statutory authorities and government business enterprises, as well as portfolio agencies or departments. Sixty-two per cent of respondents were portfolio agencies or departments, or statutory authorities with employees staffed under the PS Act.

12 This reflects the NAA’s disposal policy, issued in late 1999, that new records disposal authorities were to be based on a functional analysis undertaken in accordance with the DIRKS method and that records could not be transferred to the archives based on previously issued disposal authorities.

13 Although the term ‘electronic records’ is sometimes used to refer to analog materials (e.g. videotapes), it is used here to refer to records held in digital form on magnetic or optical computer storage media.

14 NOIE, Government Online, The Commonwealth Government’s Strategy, April 2000, http://www.noie.gov.au

15 NOIE, Better services, better government: the Federal Government’s E-government Strategy, November 2002, http://www.noie.gov.au. This strategy is discussed in more detail in Chapter 5.

16 Agencies could nominate more than one measure.