Various Trade associations publish in fields around and relevant to ILM2.0 practices. Help us stay current by posting docs or links below:
ARMA AIIM SNIA ISACA |
posted Oct 28, 2010 12:31 PM by Michael Peterson
Abstract:
The purpose of any taxonomy is to enable the subject matter (data protection) to be studied better. This paper presents a data protection taxonomy, that is, a classification of aspects relevant to data protection, that the industry is encouraged to use as a reference when asking and answering questions about data protection. This taxonomy is defined in terms of who, where, what, why, and how. The paper begins by putting the taxonomy in context, suggesting a broad view of what data protection is, providing a high level view of the taxonomy, and showing an example of how to use it. This is followed by a drill down into each category of the taxonomy to detail subcategories and provide illustrative comments. |
posted Oct 28, 2010 12:24 PM by Michael Peterson
[
updated Oct 28, 2010 12:31 PM
]
Database Information Management, DIM, is an important practice area needing defining. This report jumps into the gap. As the introduction states:
DIM is a service management style methodology for managing information and data controlled in a database or enterprise application domain in accordance with its business requirements and policies.
One example of confusion is the term "archiving" used by the database data management vendors. They confuse archive and archiving by calling a process of tiering and capacity optimization "archiving" when it has nothing to do with creating a real archive. A tier 2 or tier 3 storage repository is not an "archive", it is a tier. Moving data between tiers is not "archiving," it is "data movement" or "tiering data." (It used to be called HSM as well.) |
posted Oct 26, 2010 8:38 AM by Michael Peterson
[
updated Oct 26, 2010 10:44 AM
]
This document describes the use cases and functional requirements of Self-Contained Information Retention Format (SIRF) published by the Long-Term Retention Technical Working Group of the SNIA, Sept. 2010. It is available for public review. Feedback is solicited and can be posted at this link:
Abstract: Self-contained Information Retention Format (SIRF) Use Cases and Functional Requirements v0.5a DRAFT
“We propose an approach to digital content preservation that leverages the knowledge of the archival profession and helps archivists remain comfortable with the digital domain. One of the major needs to make this strategy possible is a digital equivalent to the physical container - the archival box or file folder - that defines a series, and that can be labeled with standard information in a defined format to allow retrieval when needed. The Self-contained Information Retention Format (SIRF) is defined to be that equivalent - a logical container for a set of (digital) preservation objects that also contains catalogs and metadata related to the entire contents of the container as well as to the individual objects. This logical container makes it easier and more efficient to provide many of the processes needed to address threats to digital content.
This document describes SIRF and the motivation for it along with its use cases and requirements. The use case model is used to derive the desired functional requirements of the SIRF format and the system that implements and uses it. The model uses graphical symbols and text to specify how users or applications in specific roles use SIRF. The document describes the use cases from a usage point of view: it doesn't describe how systems implement SIRF internally, nor does it describe SIRF internal structures or mechanisms.” |
posted Oct 13, 2010 12:25 PM by Michael Peterson
CGOC recently published an important report on information governance, " Benchmark Report on Information Governance in Global 1000 Companies" http://www.cgoc.com/register/benchmark-survey-information-governance-fortune-1000-companies
From the abstract: "This first-of-its-kind research revealed critical findings about information governance practices across global 1000 companies, including: 77% don't or can't systematically use their retention schedules; only 22% can routinely dispose of data today, yet 98% identify defensible disposal as their objective; and 85% cited poor collaboration as their biggest challenge..."
THE COST OF RETENTION AND DELETION (some sample data from the report)
COST OF FAILING TO DELETE
|
posted Sep 2, 2010 12:18 PM by Michael Peterson
[
updated Sep 2, 2010 12:26 PM
]
ABSTRACT: A joint project between SNIA and ARMA. This pivotal work set the standard for collaboration in developing business requirements - a critical step and the underpinnings of a successful ILM2.0 practice implementation. 
From the introduction: "Collaboration between IT, RIM, legal, and security professionals is the new standard of excellence in managing records and information, enhancing organizational efficiency, mitigating risk, reducing operating costs, and ultimately providing organizations better value and return on investment."
Published October 2006 |
posted Sep 2, 2010 12:10 PM by Michael Peterson
ABSTRACT: This report is the summary of a research project developed and conducted by Jim Short of the University of California, San Diego August 2007 and sponsored by the Society for Information Management Advanced Practices Council.
From the Executive Summary we read: "This report summarizes findings from a year-long study undertaken to explore the views of senior technology managers in addressing ILM. Executive and professional surveys in fifteen case study organizations and an online survey of 345 IT and storage managers were completed. These interviews sought to understand how technology executives viewed ILM, its business drivers, its implementation record to date, and its ultimate business value. The main drivers of ILM are: enterprise data growth; growth in unstructured data; limitations in relational data base management system performance; information access and security concerns; lack of effective methods for classifying data; and difficulty in assessing productivity of systems, applications and databases. The main benefits cited of ILM are increased control over data, regulatory compliance (thereby minimizing business risk), and reduced costs (by eliminating redundancies in data storage). However, half the respondents felt that to reap these benefits, systems and organizational changes must be instituted. Respondents also pointed out the key challenges in instituting ILM: high cost and complexity of the storage management environment; lack of standards, leading to confusion in the marketplace; and required up- front investments in data, applications and storage hardware." |
|
