How to make findability numbers worth something in records.

We think that the value of records, and it capacity to improve findability are self-evident.

How many records programs fail to get funding because of vague promises to improve performance?

I think it's most of them.

How can we credibly position a performance improvement if we can't position it in terms of "from x to y" - and tell people exactly how we're going to do it in ways that they both understand, and believe.

To be able to do that, we have to know the numbers.

The only way to know the numbers is to go and get them ourselves.

From x - where we've measured it.

To y - where we've gone as close to measuring it as we can.

What I see constantly in proposals, business cases and other marketing guff, is stats from IDC, Gartner etc. about how many hours are lost to finding information - on average for some unknown reference set of organisations.

I'm never quite sure what they're doing there.

I do know one thing though, executives can't invest in them.

Because those numbers don't describe their organisation.

For all they know, their organisation might be a model organisation.

Particularly if you're working for them - so they know that they have a records team who have implemented a best practice records program.

Functional classification, ISO compliant metadata schema and records system, organisation wide policy.

They spend hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars a year on their records program.

Logically, it can't be their organisation.

Even when it is, and there are huge gains to be made.

The only way they start to believe there's a gain to be made is if someone turns up and shows them that it can be made.

In a very specific area, on a very specific business process - or set of processes.

From x.

To y.

Real measurements.

People's names.

Managers signing off that they agree with current performance levels, and believe that the future proposed number - the y - is real.

Executives are just waiting, dying for people to come to them and tell them exactly where in their organisation they can improve things, by how much, and for what cost.

They're waiting for someone to come to them with projects backed up by measurements made in their own organisation.

Why not us?