Records management in the United Kingdom: Part I - Historical developments

In this issue of "The World of Records Management," we visit a country that has, perhaps, the "most special" relationship with the United States of any nation in the world--the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland --or the "U.K." as it is briefly referred to. This little slice of the world's geography (it is slightly smaller than the State of Oregon) has had a tremendously important role in shaping the nature of not only this country, but also the civilization of the entire modern world. The United Kingdom is our "Mother Country"--we inherited our language, legal system and most of our other customs and traditions from Britain. Moreover, Britain was the leading world power for about 100 years following its defeat of France at Waterloo in 1815. During this 100 years, the United Kingdom either directly or indirectly influenced the governmental systems and culture of some 80 nations (about a quarter of the world's population) that comprised the British Empire.

But what of records management? Did the British "invent" modern records management and transfer it to its American colonies before we declared our independence from Britain in 1776? To what extent is records management as practiced in Britain today similar to that practiced here? What can we learn from British-style records management that might improve our practice here? These and many other issues will be addressed in this multi-part series of articles on records management in the United Kingdom. In this first column in the series, we will look at the historical development of records management in Britain, with emphasis on its development as a management discipline within the national government.

THE ORIGINS OF RECORDS MANAGEMENT IN BRITAIN

In an earlier column we noted that England has had a system of formally filing or "registering" government documents since at least as early as the 13th century. We will examine the English registry filing systems later, but modern records management in Britain really began in the early 19th century, with the circumstances that led to the establishment of the British national archives.

Like most large national governments of important countries, the ministries of the British government began to generate substantial quantities of records by the late 18th century. In fact, during this period of time, there were some 60 buildings in the greater London area that were dedicated to storing public records. In 1836, a report of the Select Committee of the Record Commission stated:

"The most important business which falls within the province of those entrusted with the management of records is that of their proper custody. The first and most obvious defect in the present system is that records are deposited in different and widely scattered buildings."

The report of the Select Committee led to the enactment, two years later, of the Public Record Office Act, which established the British National Archives. The United Kingdom is, of course, a much older country than the United States, but even so, it is interesting to note that Britain established its national archives almost 100 years before the United States. (The U.S. National Archives was established in 1934.) In both countries, this central records office of the national government played a crucial role in inventing the professional discipline that came to be known as records management and guiding its early development throughout the country.

During its early years, the primary efforts of the Public Record Office were devoted to establishing proper physical custody over the widely scattered old and historically valuable archival records of the British government. Little attention was directed toward improving the management of the active records in the many Registry Offices in government departments throughout the British government. The primary duty of the Public Record Office was to take charge of such records and papers as each office might think proper to transfer, either because they were not required for the current business of the office, or because they could not be conveniently accommodated within the office.

Thus, the early history of records management in Great Britain proceeded along two parallel courses: the management of inactive records was the province of the national archives, while departmental registry officers managed the active records of the national government. As a result of this dual approach to records management, the concept of total life cycle management of public records did not develop in the national government of Britain during records management's formative years--a factor that strongly influences the character of British records management even today.

THE ESTABLISHMENT OF RECORDS RETENTION

In 1877, amendments to the Public Record Office Act provided the authority for the beginnings of a formal and systematic method of retention and disposal of the records of the British government. The act authorized the destruction of records which were not of sufficient public value to justify their preservation. A schedule of records to be destroyed was presented to both houses of Parliament for approval.

Thus, it seems probable to conclude that the British archival establishment may have invented the records retention scheduling concept in its modern form, although other precedents for the technique are known to have existed in earlier times.

After 1887, government departments were authorized to prepare their own schedules of records to be destroyed. The act also provided for the establishment of a committee of inspecting officers, which consisted of archivists from the Public Record Office and the creating departments, to prepare records retention schedules. Although the Public Record Office abandoned the retention schedules concept as the primary means of effecting the disposal of public records during the early 1950s, the role of the inspecting officers in this process remains in place today, over 100 years later.

It is interesting to compare the early development of records retention scheduling in the British government with the situation here in the United States. In 1889, the first General Records Disposal Act was passed by the U.S. Congress. This law marked the first legal authorization for the routine and systematic disposal of valueless records in our history. However, it was not until 1943 that the first records proposal schedule was developed by the U.S. National Archives for implementation in the federal government. This schedule was authorized by the Records Disposal Act of 1943. Thus, it was the British rather than the Americans who pioneered the concept of the record retention schedule as a tool for destroying useless records of the national government.

We will describe the current records management activities of the British Public Record Office in detail later, but we will conclude this historical discussion by noting that this central records department serves as the national archives for the records of the law courts of England and Wales, as well as all government department in these parts of the U.K. There are separate national archives for Scotland (the Scottish Record Office, located in Edinburgh) and Northern Ireland (the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland, located in Belfast). The British Public Record Once does not, however, exercise jurisdiction over the records of the British Royal Family or the records of the House of Lords. Finally, the records of local governments (the 54 counties in Britain) are excluded from coverage under the Public Records Acts.

THE ORIGINS OF ENGLISH REGISTRY OFFICES

We have, several times, mentioned Registry offices as being a central feature of records management systems in Britain. Let us now conclude our brief historical survey of the development of records management in Britain by describing the early development of these systems. As early as the 13th century, public offices of the English government had a formal system for "registering" government documents by recording each incoming and outgoing document in a daybook or "register." The act of registering a government document constituted filing it, but it also constituted legal evidence of its authenticity--a concept generally unknown in the United States. Other essential features of the early Registry offices of the British government were that they provided a highly centralized method of managing active records (each government department usually had only one Registry office serving the entire ministry), and the documents were usually registered before they were routed to the proper official for action.

These methods of managing active records may have worked fairly well during the days when ministries of the British government were relatively small, but over time, as the quantity of records proliferated, they became increasingly inefficient. Thus, beginning early in this century, numerous registry reform efforts occurred within the British civil service. The first of these involved ceasing the practice of segregating documents into only two i broad categories--incoming and outgoing items. When it was realized that this ancient practice served to impede rather than facilitate retrieval of all documents relating to a particular topic, the concept of subject filing was born, probably sometime during the 18th century. By the late nineteenth century, English Registry filing systems utilized well-developed subject-based classification systems; the practice of segregating files by type into case files and subject files became very popular.

The next major reform of Registry filing systems, this one occurring during the first half of this century, was the abandonment of the practice of single document registration. Gradually, it was realized that individual documents relating to a particular subject or case did not need to be registered as single units, and that to do so not only consumed large quantities of labor but actually impaired effective retrieval. The last major effort at Registry reform concerned the degree of centralization of Registry offices and the number of organizations and users they were designed to serve. Until World War II, when British ministries of government were relatively small, one centralized Registry office could provide efficient service to an entire department. After the Second World War, however, the burgeoning size of the British civil service began to make single departmental registries impractical. Today, the Registry offices of most departments in the national government have been decentralized at the division or branch level. The most recent registry reform efforts--computer automation--will be discussed in a subsequent article.

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ARCHIVES AND RECORDS MANAGEMENT

In concluding this discussion of the historical development of records management in Britain, it is important to understand records management's underpinnings as an archival function, its practice as an archival subspecialty, the long-standing reluctance of the Public Records Office to involve itself in the management of active records in Registry offices, and how this colors the complexion of records management as it is practiced in Britain today.

We have noted that the early efforts of the Public Record Office were directed almost exclusively toward establishing physical custody over the inactive records of the British government. This emphasis on inactive records continued during the early 20th century, and its chief proponent was one of the greatest of all archivists in any country, Sir Hilary Jenkinson, the Deputy Keeper of Public Records, who was the dean of English archivists for many years. Sir Hilary believed the administrative staff of government departments should alone be responsible for classifying records, identifying and retaining important records, and destroying the bulk of departmental records, without professional archival advice supplied by the Public Record Office. While Jenkinson recognized the need for records management techniques in the efficient management of departmental records, this approach to the role of archivists in records management had the practical effect (particularly for active records) of excluding the British archival community from integrating records management techniques into archival practice for most of the early 20th century. Thus, the reform of current recordkeeping practices in Registry offices was not sponsored by the Public Record Office, but occurred as a part of general civil service reform efforts.

As mentioned earlier, the result of this situation was a dual approach to recordkeeping in the United Kingdom during the first half of the 20th century, with the Public Record Office asserting a strong role in the management of inactive records in the British government, while Registry officers managed the active records, with little guidance or management oversight by the Public Record Office. Thus, records management and archives were regarded as separate disciplines during this period--a fact that significantly affects the practice of records management in the British national government even today.

On the other hand, despite this dual approach to recordkeeping, records management clearly had its origins as an archival subfunction in the U.R, just as it did here in the U.S. As the only information professionals who had original records as the basis of their work, British archivists were responsible for the development of the core of records management theory and practice, which parallels the situation in the U.S. Further, the title of records manager is not nearly so common in the U.K. as in North America Many persons whose primary duties are records management carry the title of archivist.

The end result of this situation is that, as a discrete management discipline, the practice of records management is not as widespread in the U.K. as it is here in the U.S. The dual approach to managing active and inactive records, coupled with the lack of aggressive sponsorship of records management by the national government combined to retard the growth of the records management discipline in the U.K.

There are numerous other factors relevant to the growth of records management in Britain that will be discussed in subsequent articles: the role of professional associations, educational courses of study, and a set of defined qualifications for obtaining a post in the profession.

We will also discuss other topics critical to understanding modern records management in the U.K.: the Grigg Report of 1954 and its impact on records retention in the British government, the evolution and current status of Registry Offices, records management in local governments and private corporations, and finally, records retention laws and regulations. Each of these issues will be viewed in the context of how they compare with records management in the U.S.

REFERENCES

Derek Charman. "The Expanding Role of the Archivist." Records Management Quarterly. Jan., 1980.

Peter Emmerson, Ed. How to Manage Your Records: A Guide to Effective Practice. Cambridge, England: ICSA Publishing, 1989.

International Council on Archives. European Archival Conference on the Creations and Organization of Contemporary Records. Microfiche of National System Descriptions: United Kingdom. Paris: International Council on Archives, 1985.

Elizabeth Shepherd. "Records Management in Britain-A Review of Some Developments in Professional Principles and Practice." Business Archives Principles and Practice. No. 67, May, 1994.

David O. Stepheng. "The Registry: The World's Most Predominant Recordkeeping System." Records Management Quarterly. Jan., 1995.

Copyright Association of Records Managers and Administrators Inc. Oct 1995
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved