The greatest problem is often resources—the people, money, and time needed to carry out documentary projects. . . . The IDP (Institutional Documentation Plan) can promote these projects by clarifying their purpose. Such a planning document can be used to work with alumni and development offices to raise money and with students, faculty, and alumni to find volunteers and participants.
—Helen Samuels1
“We archivists,” I have asserted before, when we undertake appraisal, “are literally co-creating archives. We are making history. We are exercising power over memory.” With the stakes so high, the resource commitment to doing the job well is more than justified.
—Terry Cook2
Many small colleges and universities have archival programs that accept, preserve, and make available their official records. Unfortunately, several do not grant their archivists the authority to determine continuing value or compel offices to relinquish archival records.3 Permitted only an advisory role, these archivists must find innovative ways to assert themselves into the records creation and disposition process.
Because of funding constraints, many archivists have seriously questioned the large commitment of human and financial resources necessary to conduct a functional analysis appraisal project. In her evaluation of the methodology, for example, Catherine Bailey noted that Canadian macroappraisal projects are “carried out by teams of archivists headed by a lead archivist” and cautioned that macroappraisal is a “work of careful analysis and archival scholarship, not mere procedure.”4 Similarly, in his assessment of New Zealand’s implementation of macroappraisal, John Roberts stressed that personnel “must be adequate not only in numbers, but in skill.”5
This resource conundrum is the chief obstacle to implementing a functional analysis appraisal project for the lone arranger, but he can overcome it.6 This chapter describes the preparatory work of a functional analysis appraisal project. Success depends upon a strong and well-designed foundation. The lone arranger begins by identifying and defining the institution’s broad functions that lead to the successful completion of its mission. Next, he develops the project plan of work, the necessary institutional support, and a student assistant staff. The goal, set of objectives, and plan of work guide the project but also introduce and explain it to the administration. Institutional support involves obtaining from the administration the proper authority and necessary funds, and a well-selected and properly supervised student assistant staff facilitates information gathering.
Institutional Primary and Secondary Functions
Functional analysis for the lone arranger begins with a comprehensive analysis of his institution’s primary and secondary functions. Identifying and ranking the relative value of functions of a small college or university is simple compared to those of national governments. The archivist contends with only one institution, far fewer and smaller agencies, and less overlap in administrative responsibilities. Because of this difference, Canadian macroappraisal is not a useful model. On the other hand, Helen Samuels designed institutional functional analysis for higher education, and the lone arranger can use her seven institutional functions as a guide and reference.
The lone arranger owes Samuels a great debt of gratitude because her work provides the framework from which he or she determines the relative value of office functions (chapter 6). Samuels noted that the mission of most institutions of higher education has three principal components: teaching, research, and public service. The goal of Varsity Letters was to describe these components and their corresponding functions “in order to promote their adequate documentation.”7 Each chapter was a lengthy analysis of each primary function, their secondary functions, and some of their documentary problems. The book concluded with a detailed outline of the institutional documentation plan.
Samuels identified seven primary functions. The first is confer credentials and includes all the activities that lead to a student’s graduation. The secondary functions are recruitment, admission, financial aid, and advising. The second primary function is convey knowledge and describes the teaching and learning process. Secondary functions are the curriculum development process and pedagogy training and methods. Efforts by colleges and universities to foster socialization comprise the third function. Its secondary functions include academic rules and regulations, housing, performing arts, volunteer activities, and governance. Conduct research is the fourth primary function, and the secondary functions include planning and development, the research process, and staff. The fifth primary function, sustain the institution, moves into administration and documents governance, finances, personnel, and the management of facilities. Provide public service is the sixth and often overlooked primary function. It documents all activities “designed to meet the needs of external groups” and includes the secondary functions of economic development or consultation. Finally, institutions of higher education are expected to promote culture, with such things as the performing arts, archives, and museums.8
Taken together, these seven primary functions encompass the activities and responsibilities that define most colleges and universities.9 However, the type and number of primary and secondary functions can vary widely by institution, so the archivist should compile a more applicable and relevant set. Northern Michigan University (NMU) offers a good example. Its educational mission is defined by a document known as the “Road Map to 2015,”10 which outlines the initiatives, goals, and priorities for faculty, staff, students, administrators, alumni, and all other stakeholders. The road map organizes the university’s primary functions into four broad categories: innovation, meaningful lives, campus attributes, and community engagement.
The definitions of these categories fit into four of Samuels’s institutional functions: confer credentials (meaningful lives); convey knowledge (innovation); foster socialization (community engagement); and sustain the institution (campus attributes). The archivist should revise the title of each primary function to make them more recognizable to the institution’s staff. Table 5.1 identifies the primary functions used at NMU as compared to Samuels’s institutional functions.
|
Table 5.1. Identifying Institutional Functions |
||||
|
Samuels |
Road Map |
Project |
||
|
Confer Credentials |
Meaningful Lives |
Recruitment and Retention |
||
|
Convey Knowledge |
Innovation |
Curriculum/Instruction |
||
|
Foster Socialization |
Community Engagement |
Student Development |
||
|
Sustain the Institution |
Campus Attributes |
|||
A set of secondary functions comprise the essential activities for each primary function. For example, “recruitment and retention” involves the administration of student applications, admission, enrollment, academic record, and retention efforts. The secondary functions encompass these activities. Textbox 5.1 is a list and definition of each secondary function for “recruitment and retention.” The last secondary function was one of Samuels’s seven primary functions, but I decided that it fit better as a secondary function because its activities occurred in offices whose missions and activities supported recruitment and retention.
Textbox 5.1. Recruitment and Retention Secondary Functions
The relative stability of primary and secondary functions over time, Samuels asserted, is one of the principle advantages of institutional functional analysis. Generally, primary functions do not change with the same rapidity and breadth as a college or university administrative structure. Since 1997 NMU has changed the number and names of colleges, academic departments, and administrative programs and reconfigured the organizational hierarchy numerous times while never once altering the number and scope of its primary and secondary functions. Regardless, should substantive change occur, the archivist will have to revise his functional analysis appraisal procedure.
Plan of Work
As with any endeavor of this nature and scope, a functional analysis appraisal project should follow a clearly defined plan of work. The plan is an outline that identifies the principal objectives, tasks, staff member assignments, and period allotted for task completion. Table 5.2 is a suggested plan of work designed for one calendar year starting July 1. July and August are crucial, formative months where the archivist creates the project’s support and structure. Many academic archives experience a significant drop in users and administrative queries during these months, reducing the number of distractions that can hinder project development.
|
Table 5.2. A Functional Analysis Appraisal Project Plan of Work |
|||
|
Objective |
Task |
Staff Member |
Time |
|
Develop institutional support |
Identify and describe the institution’s primary and secondary functions |
Archivist |
July |
|
Draft and distribute project introduction memo |
Archivist |
July |
|
|
Select and train project staff |
Train office project office liaisons |
Archivist |
July |
|
Select and train student assistant staff |
Archivist |
August |
|
|
Conduct information gathering activities for (number TBA) offices and programs |
Conduct institution and program specific research and information collection |
Student Assistants/Office Liaisons |
August–February |
|
Publish appraisal reports |
Develop an appraisal hypothesis for each office |
Archivist |
February–July |
|
Prepare appraisal reports |
Director |
April–June |
|
|
Design and create project website |
Director/Student Assistant |
April–June |
|
The project’s goal is to develop and implement a functional analysis appraisal project. The plan of work should reflect four fundamental objectives: (1) develop institutional support, (2) select and train project staff, (3) complete information collection for (number TBA) offices and programs, and (4) publish appraisal reports. A list of specific tasks follows each objective, and the archivist should make a conservative estimate of completion time. He will need the flexibility to change the schedule if necessary.
Institutional Support
Archives and records management authority is the first step in gaining institutional support. This authority must exist prior to planning a functional analysis project described in the previous section. To have the greatest impact, it should come from the institution’s governing body, known at most colleges and universities as the board of trustees. An effective authority statement should include the following essential elements:
In 1999, the NMU board of trustees adopted a policy statement on archives and records management that included only the second element. In 2009, the NMU board approved the revised version of the earlier policy statement (see appendix A).
A strong authority statement is not only fundamental but also improves the archivist’s chances of winning additional funding from the administration. Successful arguments for additional funding convincingly demonstrate that a functional analysis appraisal project will improve efficiency and cost-effectiveness. Experience demonstrates that administrators are constantly aware of those issues, so the archivist should focus on them and avoid using larger theoretical and philosophical ideas. The following “talking points” are possible elements for a successful argument:
They borrow heavily from rationales in support of records management programs and speak to the heart of every administrator.
Project Student Assistants
The composition and training of the project staff demands careful planning and a significant investment of the archivist’s time. One archivist (project director), three student assistants, and one project liaison from each office comprise the project staff. The archivist should expect to commit 50 percent of his time to the project, although this amount may vary depending upon staff and resources. Each student assistant should work ten to twenty hours per week and be paid an amount per hour according to the institution’s policy or the position classification.11 To ensure the greatest level of efficiency, the archivist selects currently employed archives student assistants with at least six months of experience.
At institutions of higher education, hundreds of responsible, intelligent, and eager students walk past the archives every day looking for a job. The majority do not major in history, have any particular interest in history, and have never been in an archives. However, they do possess many skills, abilities, and ancillary interests applicable to archival work. In the case of a functional analysis appraisal project, information gathering and the presentation of information in a few basic reports are the most time-consuming activities and generally require only good organizational, writing, and interpersonal skills, which many student assistants possess. The actual interpretation and analysis of the information culminating in the formal publication of appraisal results are the task of the professionally trained archivist.12
The selection, training, and evaluation of the student assistants for the project should follow a well-thought-out, professional process. At NMU, the key to the student assistant staff is the position of senior student assistant (student assistant III), known affectionately as Number One. Candidates for the position of senior student assistant must have a proven record of exceptional maturity, responsibility, professional deportment, interpersonal relationship skills, and ability to manage increasingly complex tasks. Normally, the candidate has also served two years as a student assistant I and II (see appendix B). Number One is the “lead” student assistant and is primarily responsible for basic office management and the training of new student assistants in standard operating procedures. Number One also assists the archivist in recruitment, hiring, supervision, and performance evaluations. Most Number Ones serve for one to two years.
Generally, the archives hires one or two new student assistants at the beginning of each academic year, depending upon how many graduated the previous spring. During the first six months of their employment, the archivist introduces and trains the new assistants in basic reference, accessioning, and arrangement and description work. The training normally requires one semester and involves an initial presentation, selected readings, one-on-one guidance, and practical exercises that culminate in a final semester project. After this first semester, the student assistants can conduct reference interviews, process manuscript collections, and draft standard finding aids that become MARC and EAD records. Number One chairs biweekly staff meetings to review projects, identify problems, work out solutions, and discuss new ideas for doing things.
During training I also obtain an understanding of each student’s personal and professional goals. This knowledge helps me identify the area of archival work best suited to an individual. Normally at the end of the first semester, a new student assistant has settled into a role as an accession, arrangement and description, or reference/reading room specialist. In acknowledgment of their quality work, I give each student assistant a formal title, such as arrangement and description specialist, reference and reading room coordinator, or records center coordinator. Finally, Number One adds each student assistant’s picture, title, and a very brief biographical statement to the staff page on the archives’ website.
Treating student assistants as adults and preprofessionals, with all the benefits and expectations, is the fundamental guiding principle of the staffing program. All student assistants, including Number One, are evaluated twice each semester. The midsemester evaluation is an informal meeting with myself and Number One and involves a discussion and written assessment of the student assistant’s strengths and weaknesses. A formal review and written evaluation occurs at the end of the semester. If the student assistant has not corrected difficulties identified in the midsemester evaluation, I deliver a verbal warning at the end-of-semester review. Continued failure to correct performance problems leads to a written warning at the next midsemester review and eventual termination. At the end of each semester, each student assistant has the opportunity to submit a confidential written evaluation of myself and Number One. We take these evaluations very seriously and try to implement acceptable suggestions for improvement (see appendix C).
This rigorous evaluation process has consistently produced high-quality student assistants who contribute to a very professional and productive work environment. The recruitment process focuses on freshman or sophomores because one year is required for training and the experience necessary for developing confidence working with the collections and patrons. It is a significant investment in time that pays tremendous dividends in the long run. The archives has experienced very little turnover, with most student assistants staying for their entire undergraduate career (a few have gone on to become professional archivists). Some have even returned as graduate student assistants.
Conclusion
The large diversion of resources away from other important functions is an important criticism of functional analysis. However, the critics have referred only to projects conducted by archival programs responsible for documenting large and unwieldy national government bureaucracies. Conversely, archival programs at institutions of higher education contend with a much smaller and less complex administrative structure. These administrations are more likely to be familiar with the archives and even the archivist. This fundamental difference in the nature of the two institutions makes it possible for the college or university lone arranger to marshal the necessary resources to launch a functional analysis appraisal project.
The lone arranger doesn’t have to manage the project alone. Archivists at institutions of higher education are fortunate to have at their disposal a ready supply of cheap labor. Student assistants are an underappreciated resource. College and university archivists need to acknowledge them as preprofessionals with potentially useful skills. With a little effort, an enterprising archivist can identify and mold these young people into effective project staff members. Project office liaisons are office employees, assisting student assistants with information collection and serving as guides to the office structure and culture.
Student assistants are part of a solid foundation that makes possible the next stage of a functional analysis appraisal project. Chapter 6 describes the process of information collection that leads to the identification of institutional functions and the development of administrative histories. Information collection also includes microappraisal of record series as the final activity of this stage in the project.
Notes
1. Helen Samuels, Varsity Letters: Documenting Modern Colleges and Universities (Metuchen, NJ: Society of American Archivists and Scarecrow Press, 1992), 266.
2. Terry Cook, “Macroappraisal in Theory and Practice: Origins, Characteristics, and Implementation in Canada, 1950–2000,” Archival Science 5 (2005): 103.
3. Remarkably, some college and university archives shun institutional records altogether, serving only as repositories for regional historical manuscript collections. The Michigan Technological University and Cooper Country Archives is one such program that began in the late 1960s. Curiously, Northern Michigan University, ninety miles down the road and the largest liberal arts college in the region, established its program solely as an institutional archives and did not actively begin developing its regional historical manuscript collection until the early 2000s.
4. Catherine Bailey, “From the Top Down: The Practice of Macro-Appraisal,” Archivaria 43 (Spring 1997): 116.
5. John Roberts, “One Size Fits All? The Portability of Macro-Appraisal by a Comparative Analysis of Canada, South Africa, and New Zealand,” Archivaria 52 (Fall 2001): 63–64.
6. See Cook, “Macroappraisal in Theory,” 156. Cook responded to critics who cited the large resource requirements of functional analysis by stating that
in terms of what went before, there are no comparative data about how much time it would take to do a Schellenbergian value-through-use appraisal really well. . . . If Schellenbergian archivists were held as accountable for their appraisal decision making at the same standard of research documentation, transparency, and accountability as they are under macroappraisal, . . . the resources required would be enormous, and the results still problematic.
7. Samuels, Varsity Letters, 19.
8. Ibid., 19–251.
9. Ibid., 22.
10. “Road Map to 2015,” Northern Michigan University, March 26, 2008, http://www .nmu.edu/roadmap2015.
11. Federal rules do not allow full-time undergraduate students to work more than twenty hours per week. In the fall of 2008, I had the good fortune of having Jason Woolman available as the graduate intern. Jason was a former student assistant and at the time a graduate student at the University of British Columbia School of Library, Archives, and Information Studies. He is now the senior archivist for the Musqueam Indian Band of British Columbia.
12. Generally, archivists hire student assistants to do simple jobs, such as basic data entry, reshelving, or staffing the sign-in desk. Archivists are highly trained and educated professionals. Our work is demanding and requires intelligence, dedication, and the application of rigorous standards. Many of us in higher education are reluctant to assign undergraduate student assistants more complex and demanding work because we perceive that they lack the necessary education and are generally too immature, irresponsible, and unreliable. Moreover, the time and effort required to train and supervise the few exceptions are simply too great and demanding. Initially, I, too, resisted using student assistants for anything but the simplest of jobs. A few years after my arrival, however, it became clear that the NMU administration would not approve any additional full-time staff for the archives. If the archives was to grow and become an essential part of the university, I realized that I had to find a different approach to getting things done. I needed help with everything: accessioning, arrangement and description, digital conversion, reading room and reference work, and educational outreach projects. In despair one day, I looked out the reading room window into the crowded hallway and had an epiphany: the students! I was a fool! At the time I had only three student assistants working irregular shifts watching the reading room, shelving materials, and answering the phone. Before me was a vast and untapped pool of talent.