Q: An IT colleague is proposing that we archive content more than 6 months old (still searchable) and that content more than 12 months be removed (owner will get an email alert). Should we do this?
1. From Stan Garfield
- Automatic Archiving for Content: Just Say No
- Are you content with your content?
- Improving enterprise search results: Why don’t you just tell me what you need?
2. From Howie Cohen
I suggest that you work with your compliance team. There are legal considerations for records management and retention that vary based on company and industry. IT people may have ideas but more often than not we don’t know the laws or the rules. In my practice, I always work with legal, corp comm, HR and compliance.
3. From Chuck Georgo
Is the desire for archiving driven by storage space limitations or internal retention policies? The former can be resolved with helping to support the purchasing of more storage, the latter will be tricky as they may not want to retain certain content past a certain time period. You might also try filtering the content to only retain that which can be most useful.
4. From Paul McDowall
Archiving makes a lot of sense for a field that changes and grows, but arbitrary rules for archiving are good for records managers and IT managers and often not so good for practitioners. The rules have to make sense for the practitioners first and foremost, assuming of course that there are no explicit legal reasons for the archiving rules.
5. From Tammy Bearden
This may depend on the volume, value, and visibility of the content. Can you quantify its value and therefore it’s need for visibility? If you cannot get IT to budge and the retention/re-use value is still high, you may consider converting the “expiring” content into SP wiki entries or another type record in a knowledge bank or in a work product collection.