Recent discussions about the prospects for such different standards as ISO 30300/30301 (Management System for Records, MSR) and MoReq2010 make me wonder whether present-day standard setters are in touch with real world, with its economic troubles, austerity measures, redundancies etc.
As a consultant, I am willing to use any tool that comes my way, including the above-mentioned documents. But I honestly can’t see the incentives for traditional ECM/ERM vendors to spend a fortune for implementing MoReq2010 in their products – what could they possibly gain? They’ve got more urgent problems to cope with such as competition vs SharePoint and cloud services, tougher sales due to buyers’ more cautious spending.
In a similar way, at present I see no suitable niche for MSR. If someone needs certification, it’s better to get well-established one (Quality, Information Security) for the same money. Adding MSR to Quality Managements System seems like overkill. Strategically IMHO it would be better to offer MSR as mandatory component of all the management systems…
Of course, national environments differ, as I’ve learned from discussions at LinkedIn and Twitter. Maybe European environment is more favorable for these standards… Well, I don’t mind my skeptical assessment to be proved wrong.
Russian Rim of Records Management 
IMHO these RM standards are not intended for the benefit of or as “incentives for traditional ECM/ERM vendors to spend a fortune for implementing (them) in their products..” They are for the benefit of us Records Managers who need a sound basis for assessing the various systems being marketed as the “RM solution”, and as requirements for our internal IT systems developers who should be designing RM capabilities/functionality into the core of business systems that will create and retain Records.
BTW, ISO 30300/30301 (MSR) is not the technical standard for RM systems functionality (equivalent to MoReq2010). That standard is ISO 16175.
Comment by ronald.d.layel@nasa.gov — March 5, 2012 @ 7:55 pm
Thank you for the comment! Ah, I was rather trying to emphasize similar development problems with ISO 30300 and MoReq2010 than to equate the standards themselves 🙂
You’ve said “they are for the benefit of us Records Managers”. I would disagree with that. ISO 30300/303011 target audience is senior management not records managers, and that’s actually ISO 9001 and 15489 repackaged. And as far as the MoReq2010 is concerned, that’s an IT standard for IT people written in IT-language (and even few of those claim understanding it in full) 🙂
You’ve mentioned ISO 16175 – what do you think of that one? I see it as mashup of MoReq (2001) and PRO/TNA 2002, cooked up in 2006. Old news, one might say.
Comment by Dr Natasha Khramtsovsky — March 6, 2012 @ 4:31 am