Diving into the GRDS!

It’s been almost six months since the release of version 7 of the GRDS and Government Recordkeeping would love to know: How’s the water?

Has implementation been a breeze or did you get stuck on the diving board? What were the pain points associated with the implementation? Were there any difficulties implementing it into your recordkeeping system or into a business system? What was the impact of version 7 on your public authority – was it positive, negative (if so, why?) and did the changes make it easier to implement? If QSA is to take the sharks out of the pool, what do we need to fix or improve on in the GRDS to make the water better for your public authority? Did the GRDS help you sink or swim?

The review process for GRDS v.7 generated significant discussion within Government Recordkeeping as to how the GRDS could be improved and disposal coverage increased for common and administrative records. From these discussions, QSA is now planning to release a discussion paper later in the year, putting forward possible solutions for public authorities to provide input on.

We want the water to be safe for everyone so as we look at ways of improving the GRDS into the future, we need to hear your views on GRDS version 7 and any suggestions you have for how it can be enhanced in the future.

Feedback on the GRDS can be provided through comments on our blog page or directly via email at info@archives.qld.gov.au

Here’s some background information on what the GRDS is and how it was reviewed.

What is the GRDS?

The GRDS is our most widely used retention and disposal schedule regularly topping the list of most downloaded recordkeeping publications on our website!

Version 7 of the General Retention and Disposal Schedule for Administrative Records (QDAN 249), otherwise known as the GRDS, was released in March 2014. The GRDS authorises the disposal of administrative and common public records across the Queensland government covering areas such as personnel, finance and fleet management. The version 7 update focused on human resources, industrial relations and work heath and safety records.

Work is now underway on updating the remaining functions for GRDS version 8 (due for release in 2015). Public authority feedback will also lead to further improvements in the structure of the GRDS.

How did we review the GRDS?

Reviewing a schedule the size of the GRDS is a huge undertaking that covers:

  • Research including legislative mapping across a wide range of areas covering multiple government activities that assists us to determine suitable retention periods that meet the business, legal, administrative and financial needs of the government and the community.
  • Meetings with key public authority representatives to gain specialist insights into specific business activities.
  • Drafting of the schedule and appraisal report.
  • Whole of government consultation – feedback from practitioners is vital for the GRDS to continue to meet the changing needs of Queensland
  • Feedback is analysed and balanced against the legislative research, precedents from other jurisdictions and comments from other public authorities. Re-drafting and formal approval of schedule.
  • Final draft is released.

8 thoughts on “Diving into the GRDS!

  1. Hi QSA

    Please find NQBP’s response regarding the GRDS implementation feedback in red text below.

    Q: Has implementation been a breeze or did you get stuck on the diving board?
    A: As smooth as silk

    Q: What were the pain points associated with the implementation?
    A: We had no pain points

    Q: Were there any difficulties implementing it into your recordkeeping system or into a business system?
    A: No it all went smoothly

    Q: What was the impact of version 7 on your public authority – was it positive, negative (if so, why?) and did the changes make it easier to implement?
    A: It was positive. The new retention schedule (V7) provides a good transitional framework for digitisation

    Q: If QSA is to take the sharks out of the pool, what do we need to fix or improve on in the GRDS to make the water better for your public authority?
    A: n/a

    Q: Did the GRDS help you sink or swim?
    A: Swim

    Kind Regards
    Bryan

    P.S. I encourage all others to be forthcoming with their response/feedback = think of it as a performance improvement initiative (like anything in life, unless feedback is given you can’t honestly expect things to improve or change)

    Like

  2. Hi QSA

    Please find Western Downs Regional Council’s response regarding the GRDS implementation feedback in red text below.

    Q: Has implementation been a breeze or did you get stuck on the diving board?
    A: Implementation has been quite a process. There were a lot of changes to be made. I suppose what has added difficulty for us was our retention schedule was originally made up from the General and the Local Government Schedules. We have taken the opportunity to do a complete review which has been a very long but valuable exercise.

    Q: What were the pain points associated with the implementation?
    A: Volume of changes. New numbering and function areas. We have decided to create a whole new index in our recordkeeping program as we believe this will be the easiest way of implementing all the changes. I suppose this problem existed for us because we had used both retention schedules.

    Q: Were there any difficulties implementing it into your recordkeeping system or into a business system?
    A: We are due to implement later this year and we do not envisage any problems. We have been working with another Council and we have map and plan our implementation stage.

    Q: What was the impact of version 7 on your public authority – was it positive, negative (if so, why?) and did the changes make it easier to implement?
    A: We believe the changes are very positive and I think it will be easier to implement and end users to understand and use.

    Q: If QSA is to take the sharks out of the pool, what do we need to fix or improve on in the GRDS to make the water better for your public authority?
    A: n/a

    Q: Did the GRDS help you sink or swim?
    A: Swim

    Like

  3. Hi QSA,
    Please find Sunshine Coast Council’s response regarding the GRDS implementation feedback below.

    Q: Has implementation been a breeze or did you get stuck on the diving board?
    A: We have implemented the GRDS update with Recfind (our physical system), however it was too large of a job for our “corporate system” (T1 ECM). We are also in the process of going out to tender, and will implement the update at that time.

    Q: What were the pain points associated with the implementation?
    A: Recfind was quite easy, however T1 ECM is yet to be tackled.

    Q: Were there any difficulties implementing it into your recordkeeping system or into a business system?
    A: N/A

    Q: What was the impact of version 7 on your public authority – was it positive, negative (if so, why?) and did the changes make it easier to implement?
    A: It was positive and is much easier on end users.

    Q: If QSA is to take the sharks out of the pool, what do we need to fix or improve on in the GRDS to make the water better for your public authority?
    A: n/a

    Q: Did the GRDS help you sink or swim?
    A: Swim

    Regards,

    Carl Duncan

    Like

  4. Thanks for your response Carl. We’re glad to hear that GRDS version 7 is easier for end users. One of the aims of the last review was to reduce duplication in the GRDS and to combine record classes where possible. We are continuing with this approach as we work on updating the remaining functions, so hopefully there will be a further reduction in the size of the GRDS which will assist with system implementation.

    Like

  5. Hi QSA

    Here’s the view from MBRC:

    Q: Has implementation been a breeze or did you get stuck on the diving board?
    A: We started to upload the csv file to our EDRMS on 26 March, only to find the format had changed since last time, so had to pay and wait approx. 4 weeks for a new script to be written to do the conversion.
    We use a third party product to upload the EDRMS and it woud be much better if QSA can start working with some of the major vendors to write something to do direct upload. Or, update your EDRMS Guidelines to include a requirement that an EDRMS must have the ability to do this. This would increase pressure on vendors to provide this option.

    Q: What were the pain points associated with the implementation?
    A: Conversion from V6 to V7 in the EDRMS is a huge pain. Our Archives Team have had to go back to doing manual disposal until this is completed. Yep, we are still going and hope to finish before Christmas.

    Q: Were there any difficulties implementing it into your recordkeeping system or into a business system?
    A: Our main problem has been finding the time to do the conversion. This is an onerous task and as bulk changing retention and disposals forces reindexing of documents in our EDRMS, it has to be done on days when system performance impact is minimal.

    Q: What was the impact of version 7 on your public authority – was it positive, negative (if so, why?) and did the changes make it easier to implement?
    A: The main impact has been the delay converting in the EDRMS. Our Archives Team also had to reschedule some planned disposals due to some of the changes in retention periods. Most of our records are already appraised so the Executive Summary was essential.

    Q: If QSA is to take the sharks out of the pool, what do we need to fix or improve on in the GRDS to make the water better for your public authority?
    A: Having static numbering would reduce the workload and system impact this exercise involves. Having an amnesty or 30 day “cooling off” period invoked so we can continue using an existing version if work is currently in progress. eg. if the records have been sent to Manager for sign-off and a new schedule is released before authorisation is received

    Q: Did the GRDS help you sink or swim?
    A: Still treading water.

    Regards
    Angie Garnett

    Like

    • Thanks Angie for your feedback on the issues surrounding the implementation of the GRDS into an eDRMS. We are looking at your suggestions in relation to a static numbering system for the GRDS and will consult with you prior to the release of the next version of the GRDS and consultation with vendors.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s