Macroappraisal Kiwi Style: Reflections on the Impact and Future of Macroappraisal in New Zealand

Both macroappraisal and the Australian records continuum-based DIRKS methodology have been influential in the New Zealand debate on appraisal in recent years. The primary influence of macroappraisal has been in the area of prioritisation of appraisal work. This paper considers New Zealand thinking on prioritisation, and the influences of risk management and functional analysis on this issue. A lack of agreement on the purpose of appraisal in the professional literature is noted, and some personal suggestions are offered on a model taking elements from macroappraisal and other methodologies.     

The Development in Germany of Archival Processing – The Vertical and Horizontal Appraisal

Based on a discussion about appraisal which has been going on for over a 100 years, the so-called vertical and horizontal appraisal have been developed and tested since the middle of the 1990s. During this process the tasks, functions and competences of the agencies, which are to be appraised were analysed. The appraisal of the content itself is undertaken only when multiple archival processing has been eliminated by this method and the most significant records identified. Actual tasks and functions of single administrative branches of different institutions (federal government, states, counties, and municipalities) are appraised, apart from already closed records. In this way, agencies creating archives and records today receive written decisions on the appraisal of records, which will be offered to the archives in future. Archivists of different institutions are involved in this appraisal procedure. The experience gained here has continually developed the techniques of vertical and horizontal appraisal. This appraisal procedure is being further developed in a constant balance between theory and practice.     

Macroappraisal in Theory and Practice: Origins, Characteristics, and Implementation in Canada, 1950–2000

Macroappraisal as developed in Canada has had significant currency in archival literature over the past decade, and aspects of its program and ideas have been implemented in other jurisdictions. For the first time, this essay probes the theoretical and practical origins of macroappraisal in Canada since 1950 and why its originators no longer found convincing the predominant status quo on appraisal as articulated by T.R. Schellenberg. The essay then summarizes the theory of macroappraisal as articulated at the National Archives of Canada, and the strategic and program infrastructure developed in the 1990s to turn the new theory into operational reality. As no archival concept is universally locked in time, the evolution and changes in the macroappraisal program, both in theory and strategy, are also analysed in its Canadian home base over its first decade, as well as some internal and external criticisms of it. The essay intends to illuminate the deeper context of macroappraisal, so that an international audience may better understand its strengths and weaknesses. As the author is the principal architect of macroappraisal, the essay consists of equal parts of archival history, theoretical analysis, and personal reflection.     

Macroappraisal in the Netherlands. The First Ten Years, 1991–2001, and Beyond

A new appraisal method for national government records introduced in the 1990s aimed at reducing backlogs in the transfer of pre-1976 records to the National Archives of the Netherlands. Since then, appraisal and disposition decisions are based on macro analysis. Preventing new backlogs from occurring was a second goal. The socalled project PIVOT (1991–2001 and after) coordinated the introduction, development, and implementation of the new appraisal method. This article describes the objectives, method, and appraisal criteria, as well as the criticism and laborious progress of this ongoing story. This article is a revised and enlarged version of an earlier publication, “Makrohindamine Hollandis. Eskimesed kümme aanstat: 1991–2001”, TUNA Ajalookultuuri ajakiri 4 (2003): 150–154.     

“But am I Getting My Records?” Squaring the Circle with Terms and Conditions Expressed in Relation to Function and Activity

The dilemma of implementing macroappraisal is to transform theory and methodology into selection and preservation of archival records through disposition procedures. Having shifted the focus from the record to the function from which it derives, how does a program or an appraisal project committed to the macroappraisal approach get back to the record to ensure compliance and accountability? This paper uses the experience of Library and Archives Canada (LAC) as a form of case study (a model for success) which examines how applied theory and program practice come to terms with each other. It analyses the tensions, the challenges, and the creativity that inevitably arise when turning macroappraisal from an appraisal methodology into a fully articulated archival disposition program whose final “deliverable” is the archival record. Making things simple, it turns out, is complicated.     

Beyond Sampling: Returning to Macroappraisal for the Appraisal and Selection of Case Files

Case files are voluminous and present challenges to archivists, government departments, and other institutions that are charged with the responsibility of managing these records either throughout or at various stages of their life cycle. To date, archivists and records administrators, both in Canada and worldwide, have recognized the case file challenge and are rethinking solutions for dealing with this persistent problem. This article argues that by building on our cumulative knowledge acquired through years of applying macroappraisal and functional analysis to the appraisal of government records, and staking out a modern definition of “case file records” based on their transactional characteristics, we indeed do have the skills and the expertise to tackle the problem and develop a new solution for case file records. Rather than taking a piecemeal approach or relying on sampling techniques, Library and Archives Canada (LAC) Case Files Appraisal Working Group (CFAWG)¹ demonstrates how to consistently make keep-destroy appraisal decisions for the disposition of operational case file records.²     

Teaching Macroappraisal: A View of the Literature

The author, who is Guest Reviews Editor for this special issue on macro-appraisal, introduces and provides context for four review articles, written by archival educators from Canada, the United States, and Australia, that discuss the most important works they use to teach macroappraisal and why these works are chosen. While each article demonstrates the unique characteristics of the archival education program in which the author is situated, they are united by a common theme—the need for educators to prepare students, as best they can, to take their places as practising professional archivists.     

Accounting for Macroappraisal at Library and Archives Canada: From Disposition to Acquisition and Accessibility

This article explains the re-engineering of the government records disposition program at Library and Archives Canada (LAC) in 2002–2004. The main point is that the framework of accountability has grown since the launch of the macroappraisal program (often referred to as the planned approach to disposition) at the (former) National Archives of Canada (NA) in 1990–1991. The opportunity for building an expanded framework of accountability presented itself after 2000 when a number of “push” (internal to the disposition program) and “pull” (external to the program) factors coalesced to challenge a reduced program. The reengineering exercise involved LAC government records archivists working together to develop the following new program documentation: Government-Wide Plan (GWP); Memorandum of Understanding (MOU); Appraisal Checklist; Terms and Conditions for the Transfer of Archival Records; Briefing Note for the Librarian and Archivist of Canada; and the Multi-Institutional Disposition Authority (MIDA) for Operational Case Files. Significant work also went into creating version three of the Records Disposition Authorities Control System (RDACS). As a result of reengineering the appraisal and disposition program, there is an accountability framework now in place for more than keep-destroy recommendations, one that has moved beyond disposition to include acquisition of and accessibility to the archival record.     

Some Functions are More Equal than Others: The Development of a Macroappraisal Strategy for the National Archives of Australia

In 1999–2000 the National Archives of Australia (NAA) adopted a functions-based approach to appraisal. Since that time functional appraisal projects have for the most part been conducted in cooperation with individual agencies. What has been missing is a broad whole-of-government or macroappraisal framework which might assist with the strategic prioritisation of projects, the allocation of resources and the identification of high-value functions, activities and record classes. This article describes a project commenced by the NAA during 2003–2004 to research and develop a functions-based macroappraisal framework for current and prospective appraisal and for retrospective application to records of the past 30 years of the Australian Government. The article compares the Australian approach with macroappraisal strategies pursued in Canada, the Netherlands and South Africa.     

Macroappraisal, the Next Frontier: An Approach for Appraising Large and Complex Government Institutions

“Macroappraisal, the next frontier” describes a records disposition pilot project which was based on a refinement of the current macroappraisal methodology in use at Library and Archives Canada. Still very much a work in progress, the refined approach builds upon macroappraisal theory and methodology, and this paper presents its application to Fisheries and Oceans Canada, a major federal government department in the Government of Canada. The project focused on providing the institution with total records disposition coverage based on a single archival appraisal and two Records Disposition Authorities. This paper demonstrates the feasibility of appraising records at the mandate level instead of at the function or program level. It also outlines and points to the benefits and advantages of appraising large government institutions intheir totality rather than in smaller, discrete sectors, branches, or divisions. We wish to thank the journal’s readers for their comments on an earlier draft of this article. We also wish to thank Candace Loewen for her insights, comments, and encouragement. Thanks are also extended to our colleagues who commented on various aspects of the project during Library and Archives Canada (LAC) appraisal seminars. Kerry Badgley also wishes to thank Sarah, Paul, and Shannon Badgley for providing a daily reminder of why it is important to document the past.