1. Research Agendas for Recordkeeping/ Recordkeeping Metadata in SOA RCRG Workshop COSI, Monash University 18 November 2008

2. CRKM Outcomes Recordkeeping practice is predominantly governed by paper models –Tools manage records rather than managing recordkeeping –Understandable as most RMs and archivists are dealing with paper systems and/or digital versions –EDRMS is seen as the solution

3. CRKM Outcomes Service orientation is good for recordkeeping –Interoperability and metadata are part and parcel –Realise Bearman/Cook/Continuum dreams of integrating recordkeeping processes into digital business processes –Capture records =>capture recordkeeping metadata rather than having to manually, retrospectively re- create it –Undo the compromises of the paper world => better recordkeeping and archiving systems

4. CRKM Outcomes Mixed Response to CRKM presentations –‘Science Fiction’ –What does that mean? Is it the message / the delivery / the audience /the timing / the context? –Perhaps partly the ‘healthy hothouse’ problem?

5. Taken from Paul Bonnington’s presentation at VERSI eCoffee 6 May 2008

6. CRKM Outcomes Further research questions:- –Recordkeeping as services What are they? What do they look like? –Recordkeeping in SOA What are the recordkeeping requirements of service oriented architectures? Other bones N-ary rships Documentary forms

7. Windows of opportunity COSI Discovery Grant Idea –Discretionary use systems and continuum tools eGovernment - e.g. AGIMO’s Service Delivery BlueprintAGIMO’s Service Delivery Blueprint eResearch

8. eGovernment

9. eResearch Crying out for recordkeeping (but don’t know it) –Research data management Research data as records of research processes –Institutional repositories Archiving described as ‘orphaning items from their context’ Getting recognition of the need for Information Infrastructure not just IT Infrastructure Data now recognised as part of infrastructure (Rhys Francis), now have to get them to see that metadata is! Healthy hothouse problem

10. eResearch Archival institutions as repositories of research data –Can meet expectations of the eScholar? Persistent id/citation of records as research data Integration into publication, teaching and learning in sustainable and scalable manner (e.g. LOM) Projects –ANDS – ‘transform the disparate collections of research data around Australia into a cohesive collection of research resources’ANDS –Project Bamboo – ‘How can we advance arts and humanities research through the development of shared technology services?’Project Bamboo –eFramework – ‘provides information to institutions on investing in and using information technology infrastructure. It advocates service-oriented approaches to facilitate technical interoperability of core infrastructure as well as effective use of available funding.’eFramework

11. eResearch Beyond SOA, recordkeeping in universities of interest:- –Do the models from government apply? Assume employee/public servant’s personal stake in the records is small/negligible Academics tend to have a greater stake in their research records, as well as the records potentially having other stakeholders Individualistic culture along with professional/academic staff divide –Broad spectrum of technology adoption Pockets of more adventurous use of technology e.g. digital repositories, collaborative workspaces Lots of luddites – through choice and circumstance

12. Discipline University Research data and records creation and management for researcher needs Ethical Productive QualitySecurity Collaborative Methodology Discipline data management practices and infrastructure Department policy and infrastructure Research data management policy Ethics Research code of conduct eResearch Legislative requirements Research funding requirements Aust. Code for Responsible Research Societal, research and other communities expectations

13. eScholarship Diagrams