It resulted in not only a critique of the life cycle model but in the definition of an alternative model of framework (Bantin, 1998). In this concept, the argument is that the record does not necessarily pass through three phases as is the case in the life cycle model. Rather, managing records is seen as a continuous process where one element of the continuum passes seamlessly into another. As cited in Shepherd and Yeo (2003), McKemmish (1997) argues that in the life cycle model, records are kept for organizational purposes during the early stages of their lives, and later in their final stages they become society’s memory records as they become archives. Contrary to that, the continuum model proponents believe that records function simultaneously as organizational and collective memory of the society from the very early stage of creation.
Additionally, a continuum is something continuous of which no separate parts are discernible, elements are continuously passing into each other. The driving force behind the formulation of this model was the concern of the missing strategy for the archivists to intervene in the records management process from the creation stage especially for electronic records (McKemmish, 1997). Similarly, Upward (1998) contends that, the continuum model recognizes that, in the electronic age physical custody is no longer an essential element of preservation strategy.
Moreover, (Upward, 2001) reveals that, there are four coordinated and integrated dimensions in the continuum model. The first one is “to create” which encompasses the actors who carry out decisions, communications and acts in the organization. The second dimension refers to the “capturing” of records. This encompasses the recordkeeping systems of the organization which captures records in their daily
business transactions to serve as evidence of activities of a particular unit and organization as a whole. “Organising” is the third dimension of the continuum. This refers to the manner in which the organization or individual defines its recordkeeping regime which constitutes to the archive as memory of its business functions. The last dimension “pluralise” is concerned with how the archives are brought into an encompassing framework to provide a collective social historical and cultural memory of the corporate.
Commenting on the dimensions of continuum model, Shepherd and Yeo (2003) argued that, dimensions in the continuum are not time based, but rather they represent different perspectives on the management of records. They went on to say that, circles in the dimensions move out from the creation of records of business activities, to capturing of records as evidence to their inclusion in the formal system of organization’s records management, and lastly, the dimension considers the needs of society collective memory.
In summary, Xiaomi (2003) rightly differentiates between the records life cycle and the records continuum models as shown in Table 2.1.
Table 2. 1 Differences between Records Life Cycle and Records Continuum models
Model Aspect Records life cycle model Records Continuum Model
Origins evolved from the need to effectively
control and manage physical records after World War II
evolving from the more demanding need to exercise control and management over electronic records for digital era Elements of
records definition
physical entity content
context structure Major concerns in records management records-centred, product-driven
focus on records as tangible physical entities, the physical existence of records themselves
paper world
purpose-centred, process and customer-driven
focus on the nature of the records, the recordkeeping process, the behaviours and relationships of records in certain environments
digital world Records
movement patterns
time-based: records pass through stages until they eventually die, except for the chosen ones that are reincarnated as archives
time sequence: records processes take place in a given sequence
multi-dimensional: records exist in space/time not space and time
simultaneity: records processes can happen at any point in the record's existence, or even precede it Recordkeeping
perspectives
exclusive
single purpose
organizational or collective memory
current or historical value
inclusive
multiple purposes
can be organizational and collective memory
can have current, regulatory and historical value from the time of creation simultaneously not sequentially
Recordkeeping process
There are clearly definable stages in recordkeeping and they create sharp distinctions between current and historical recordkeeping
The recordkeeping and archiving should be integrated
Criteria for selecting archives
currency or historical value continuing value, including current and historic value
Time of archival appraisal
end of records movement from beginning to end
Role of records professional
passive and reactive
locked into custodial role and strategies
Proactive-post custodians:
recordkeeping policy makers
standard setters
designers of recordkeeping systems and implementation strategies consultants educators/trainers advocates auditors Records management tasks
things are done to the records in fixed stages, in a given sequence by particular professional group
records managers and archivists have no business directing what records an organization creates; they are relegated to receiving the physical objects once created
fragmented and desperate accountability of creators, users, records managers and archivists
integration of business process and recordkeeping processes-the task can happen in almost in any sequence by any professional group
records managers are accountable for not only the maintenance, but also for the creation of evidence of organization's purposes and functions
integrated framework for the accountabilities of players and partnerships with other stakeholders
Although the records continuum theory addresses management of electronic records by managing e-records as a continuous process where one element passes seamlesly into another; the Records Continuum Model did not form the study theoretical foundation since it does not address issues of electronic government.
