I think it's important to recognise that records are a servant, not a master.
Too often, we try and impose barriers on people that make it seem like records are the master, not the servant.
The fact is, that records only get kept properly if keeping them "properly" means that they enhance the work that people need to do.
Any time they detract from it - they just don't get done - or as we might say, don't get kept "properly."
This means that the root of records success is always enhancing the work that people need to do.
This does leave room for regulation.
When your regulator is doing their job, organisations are aware that large chunks of their work can be undone if they don't do the records work, because any profits that are made can be undone retrospectively.
It can also work in government - governments know that media time is important for keeping public opinion firmly behind their projects, and when it's not, the negotiating gets tougher because the swing votes start to see it as OK to vote no - and nothing makes this easier than a government that can't get good stories into the media because they keep tripping over themselves.
Fact is though, not all regulators show up.
Until they do, keep records as a servant.
If keeping the record genuinely enhances the work, it will get done "properly."
If it doesn't enhance the work, we're probably kidding ourselves, and it's probably better to find a work enhancing definition of "properly" or we're just going to look like we aren't any good at what we do.