The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at
www.emeraldinsight.com/0956-5698.htm
RMJ
22,2
98
Received 3 October 2011
Revised 5 March 2012
3 May 2012
Accepted 8 May 2012
Records Management Journal
Vol. 22 No. 2, 2012
pp. 98-115
q Emerald Group Publishing Limited
0956-5698
DOI 10.1108/09565691211268162
ARTICLES
Archivists 2.0: redefining the
archivist’s profession in the
digital age
Maria Kallberg
Department of Information Technology and Media, Mid Sweden University,
Härnösand, Sweden
Abstract
Purpose – Public organizations are investing in e-government development and e-services to
improve the interaction and services to the citizens. Archivists need to act more pro-active to capture
and manage records in order to be accessible both in the present and in the long-term. Archivists need
to understand the conceptual context and business processes in which the records are created. This
study aims to focus on an ongoing process within a specific context, which may have direct, but also
future implications for archivists’ professional identity. Professional identity is understood as a sense
of shared understandings and skills, experiences, common way of perceiving problems and their
possible solutions. The study is meant to answer the overall research question and sub-questions:
What is the status of archivist professionals’ positions and practice within public organizations? What
organizational effect has the change from paper-based to electronic record keeping had on archivists’
professional positions and practice within organizations? How do archivists perceive themselves in
their professional roles, i.e. identity? Are there any critical competence issues that need to be solved
that are connected to new requirements in working methods related to electronic record keeping? and
How do archivists define their skills and working performance?
Design/methodology/approach – The data presented and analyzed in this article are based on a
literature review and an empirical study. The literature covers areas related to archivists’ professional
practice and future role. The empirical study is based on interviews with nine municipality archivists
at nine different Swedish municipalities identified by the Swedish Association of Local Government
and Regions as “good example” e-government municipalities. All interviews were undertaken during
January and March 2011.
Findings – The findings provide information on how archivists define their current and future
professional role in relation to the organization and the development of information technology: the
status of archivist professionals’ positions and practice, for example, within public organizations. It
explores the importance of strategic approaches to managing electronic records – from their creation
throughout their whole existence, including long-term preservation – and considers necessary
changes to the professional image of archivists and the skills they need.
Originality/value – This article will be of interest to record keeping practitioners working in the
shift to e-government in local contexts and also to educators, as there appears to be a shift in the skills
and knowledge required by those working in local government.
Keywords Electronic records management, Record keeping, Public sector organizations, Skills,
Strategic management, Information management, Records management, Archives, Sweden
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Electronic information makes it possible to use information for many different
purposes, more than has ever been possible before. This has affected the interactions
between citizens and government, and has had an impacted on public administration Archivists
(Chun et al., 2010; Dollar, 1992; Fang, 2002; Fountain, 2001). For example in e-services, profession in the
born-digital records are used to improve services to citizens and also to streamline
internal governmental processes. This raises challenges when integrating data from digital age
different sources to ensure privacy of information. Records referring to or about
individuals cannot be shared without considering privacy-related regulations (Chun
et al., 2010; Warner and Chun, 2009) and citizens need to be confident that the 99
information will be kept and used in a protected environment (Chun et al., 2010; Evans
and Yen, 2005; Fang, 2002). Records from complex e-government services have to be
captured and managed in order to be accessible both in the present and in the
long-term. Otherwise it is not possible to manage, maintain and preserve the records to
fulfill their purpose as evidence. It is important to connect the information to the
process and the context in which it belongs in order to understand the value of the
information. Issues of responsibility have to be taken into consideration – that is; who
owns and is responsible for the records, their appraisal and how to solve long-term
preservation issues. The challenges described must be solved and therefore public
organizations are in need of and dependent on specialized knowledge in order to be
successful.
This research is about whether and how electronic recordkeeping as part of
e-government development has affected archivists as professionals, using nine
Swedish local governments (municipalities) as an arena for the study. Archivists in
Sweden claim to cover records management as well as archives management according
to McKemmish’s definition as:
The managing of records from their creation during their whole existence, in order to render
accessibility of meaningful records for as long as they are of value to people, organizations
and societies (McKemmish, 2001).
This research is part of a larger comparative study of e-government best practice in the
nine municipalities. These municipalities were chosen because the Swedish
Association of Local Authorities and Regions (2010, 2011) had identified them as
good examples of e-government development (www.skl.se/web/e-forvaltning.aspx).
The overall research aim is to establish the awareness of recordkeeping legislative
demands as part of e-government development and its effect on archivists’ professional
status, e.g. positions and practice. E-government development is a prioritized political
issue in Sweden, therefore it affects archivists, both as a collective professional group
and as individual practitioners. E-government development is an on-going process
within a specific context, which may have direct, but also future implications for
archivists’ professional identity. Professional identity is understood as a sense of
shared understandings and skills, experiences, and a common way of perceiving
problems and their possible solutions (Evetts, 1999). This identity is formed and
reproduced through a shared and common educational background and professional
training, work practice and memberships in professional associations (Evetts, 1999).
As a first step, during September and October 2010 a content analysis was
conducted of the municipalities’ e-strategies considering the motives or the “why” of
the strategies, the goals or the “what” of the strategies and the methods to achieve the
goals or the “how” of the strategies. The findings revealed issues and situations of
relevance to the advancement of recordkeeping. For example, only five of the nine
RMJ municipalities addressed electronic records and/or electronic document and records
22,2 management as necessary ongoing activities, even though implementing e-services is
acknowledged. There was little mention of how to ensure long-term preservation.
IT-competence has been revealed as being of higher value to an organization than
recordkeeping competence, even though the importance of access to and reuse of
information is recognized as being vital to the achievement of strategic goals (Kallberg,
100 2010).
This second step of the research addresses the following research question and
sub-questions:
RQ1. What is the status of archivists as professionals, e.g. positions and practice
within public organizations?
† What organizational effect has the change from paper-based to electronic
recordkeeping had on the archivists’ professional positions and practice
within the organizations?
† How do archivists perceive themselves in their professional roles,
i.e. identity?
† Are there any critical competence issues that need to be solved that are
connected to new requirements in working methods related to electronic
recordkeeping?
† How do archivists define their skills and working performance?

This introduction is followed by a presentation of the research setting, the research

methodology, a literature review of related work and a presentation of findings. The
article ends with discussion and conclusions.

The research setting

Within the Swedish context public organizations’ records are official documents and
Swedish citizens are entitled to have free access to them from the time they are created
or received (The Freedom of the Press Act SFS 1949:105) except where records are
classified for reasons of secrecy. Official documents are defined as the organizations’
archives (The Archive Act SFS 1990:782).
Municipalities in Sweden are independent self-governing local governments with a
wide range of responsibilities, covering education, social services, childcare, health and
environmental protection, sewerage and water etc. There are 290 Swedish
municipalities which differ in geographic area and population size
(www.skl.se/kommuner_och_landsting) and they are at varying stages of achieving
e-government implementation.
The municipalities’ organizational structure is complex. It consists of politically
controlled committees with administrative departments that carry out their decisions.
Each of the municipalities is obliged by law to function as their own archival authority,
which means that records and archives management carry the responsibility for
fulfilling the legislative demands that exist according to the Archive Act (SFS
1990:782). This meets the requirement that responsibility for recordkeeping is assigned
to senior management with appropriate authority within the organization (The
Swedish Standards Institute SS-ISO 15489-1, 2001. Section 6.3). Another responsibility
of the archival authority is to function as a repository for the archives, often after the
archives have been transferred for long-term preservation. Each committee’s archives Archivists
are to be kept separated from every other committee’s archives in accordance with the profession in the
Archive Act (SFS 1990:782). Public records are part of cultural heritage and must be
preserved, kept and managed so that they meet the right of access to official digital age
documents, the need for justice, administration and research. This includes appraisal,
retention, disposal, description, protection and responsibility issues. The Swedish
National Archives has no direct authority and their regulations are considered to be 101
only guidelines for local government.
Archivists in municipalities often work with a wide range of tasks, from custodians
of repositories to strategic experts on electronic recordkeeping. Archivists are often
organizationally connected to the archival authority and have an advisory and audit
function over how the other committees meet the legislative demands regarding
recordkeeping. Archivists are often involved in guiding and teaching administrators
within administrative departments in the work of establishing retention and disposal
schedules. Therefore, archivists need knowledge of legislative requirements to conduct
appraisal. They often work as managers of the archival repositories. Archivists have
long experiences in how to process archives using arrangement and description
principles in order to make them accessible to the public. Since the public is entitled to
access public records, the work of organizing visits and tours for information users at
the archival repositories is important. Archivists also need to be skilled in interpreting
and applying the secrecy legislation in order to make decisions on information retrieval
and access.

Research methodology
The data presented and analyzed in this article is based on a literature review and an
empirical study. The literature selected for the present article is primarily chosen from
previous research published in peer reviewed journals and well established
professional writers. The literature initially explored the overall research topic
i.e. professional challenges related to recordkeeping awareness in e-government
development and implementation of e-services. The literature covers areas related to
archivists’ professional practice and future role. The literature review was completed
before the empirical study was conducted. The design of the questionnaire was
informed by the literature review as well as the specific national administrative and
legislative context. The empirical study is based on interviews with nine municipal
archivists at nine different Swedish municipalities. The decision to conduct interviews
was made in the light of the research questions that sought to find out the interviewee’s
personal thoughts, feelings, experiences and expectations, therefore a qualitative
method was chosen. The study presented is part of a larger body of research based on
the nine municipalities in order to identify recordkeeping challenges related to
electronic recordkeeping. These municipalities were chosen because the Swedish
Association of Local Authorities and Regions had identified them as
good examples in the development and provision of e-Government services
(www.skl.se/web/e-forvaltning.aspx). The selected informants are archivists
employed at the same municipalities.
All interviews were undertaken between January and March 2011. The interviews
were conducted individually and recorded after the interviewee had given their
consent. The interviews were conducted by phone with consideration to geographical
RMJ distances. Notes were also taken during the interviews, the length of which ranged
22,2 between 37-60 minutes. The interviews of the first and second informants were
conducted by a consultant, as part of a related project. In these two cases the author
received transcribed interviews from the consultant as print outs and added them to
the study.
A questionnaire with semi-structured questions was used as a research tool. The
102 questions were standardized – the same questions were asked and the interview
situations were also the same for the interviewee and the interviewer (Trost, 2005). The
questionnaire was divided into five themes. The aim of the questions was to establish
how archivists define themselves in their professional practice and future role
(attachment 1: “Questionnaire”). The questionnaire contained specific initial questions
regarding background facts: title, years of service, education, organizational affiliation
and the reason for the choice of profession. The first theme was followed by more
open-ended questions concerning professional practice, electronic recordkeeping, skills
and future role of the profession. The questionnaire ended with an open question for
additional comments.
The interviews were compiled and sent out to the informants for information and
comments, which were added to the data. As a last step each interview was analyzed
by using a part analysis of the text, as described by Holme and Krohn Solvang, in order
to categorize the statements (Holme and Krohn Solvang, 1997). This type of
quantification can create perceptions of the values and facts that the interviewees
consider to be important (Holme and Krohn Solvang, 1997).
The research findings are not representative for all archivists working in Swedish
municipalities, since the respondents were specially chosen as good examples of
e-government development (www.skl.se/web/e-forvaltning.aspx). However, all
Swedish municipalities must comply with legislation that mandates their functions,
responsibilities and tasks. Therefore, the findings would have relevance in any local
government body that is implementing e-services.

Research findings
The research findings presented and analyzed in this article are based on a literature
review and an empirical study. The findings will be presented in that order.

Professional challenges – literature review

The transition from paper-based to electronic recordkeeping will have consequences
for organizational structures and the relationship between records and archive
management. The archive can no longer be seen as an entity – the focus must rather be
on the context in which it has been created and will be used (Hofman, 2005; Myburgh,
2005). Electronic recordkeeping has to involve looking at recordkeeping processes in
order to understand what must be done to capture a record and fix it in its context of
creation so that it can be recalled, re-presented and distributed (Asproth et al., 2010;
Upward, 2005). Therefore, recordkeeping skills need to be represented strategically in
organizations and in the processes in which records are created and used in order to
understand the context, which is vital to be able to manage, maintain and preserve the
records to fulfill their purpose as evidence. A proactive approach including high-level
support is needed (Choksy, 2008; Dionne and Carboni, 2009; Kahn, 2004;
Weller-Collison et al., 2008).
 However, research conducted by Runardotter (2007) revealed that archivists are Archivists
seldom consulted in the purchasing process of information technology (IT) systems, profession in the
but are still expected to deal with legacy systems. The reason behind this seems to be
that archivists are connected to paper-based records, which have low priority within digital age
the organizations and are therefore treated differently to digital information
(Runardotter, 2007).
McDonald on the other hand, points out that archivists have an important role in 103
filling the gaps in the perceptions of meanings of concepts, the functions and status of
the information jurisdictions between records management and data management, as
well as a disparity between education and skills of records managers and information
system professionals (McDonald, 2010). McDonald recommends integration, that data
and records should be managed from a corporate perspective via archivists work in
establishing agreements or schedules that govern ongoing systematic transfer of
records to the archives. To do this, there must be a comprehensive understanding of an
organization’s information holdings (McDonald, 2010).
A large study conducted and completed 2002 in the UK found that local authority
archives lacked resources and expertise in electronic records management. Many
interviewed archivists felt powerless – but were aware that something had to be done;
otherwise they risked losing evidential records in the future (Barata, 2004).
A literature review, examining the impact of the Freedom of Information Act on
records management services in public authorities in the UK, specially focusing on
local government, was undertaken in 2008-2009 within a research project at the
Department of Information Studies at University College London (UCL). The study
suggests that there was significant preparation for the full implementation of the Act,
which came into full force in 2005. Many authorities recognized the need to review
retention schedules and implement records management systems across the whole
organization, but the necessary culture change and strategic leadership did not follow
and there is little evidence that records management has changed (Shepherd et al.,
2009).
The transition from paper-based to electronic records has made the Swedish
National Archives establish new regulations. The Swedish National Archives released
a new regulation on digital records in July 2009 establishing the importance of strategy
and planning for preservation (RA-FS 2009:1; Riksarkivet, 2009). The Swedish
National Archives have also reflected the process-oriented approach on archives
descriptions (RA-FS 2008:3). However, the regulations concern only national
authorities and are considered to be only guidelines for local governments, but it is
important that the local governments adopt these guidelines in order to be able to
embrace the new challenges brought by the change from paper-based to electronic
recordkeeping brings.
According to a report published by the Swedish National Archives in 2010 on
national authorities’ current status on electronic recordkeeping, 97 percent of the
national authorities stated that they had electronic documents, yet 64 percent of the
authorities had no strategies for long-term preservation and 54 percent declared that
they did not have a system for long-term preservation. Furthermore, the same report
published results on whether or not the national authorities presented their electronic
records according to the obligatory archival description 33 percent answered “no”, and
37 percent stated “to some extent”. The results of the study show that there is a
RMJ massive need for recordkeeping improvement within the Swedish public sector
22,2 (Riksarkivet, 2010).
Several researchers argue that archivists need to change their role from keepers to
work more pro-actively as auditors (Hurley, 2005; Runardotter et al., 2006; Yakel, 2000).
However, archivists in Sweden working at archival authorities already have this role,
but do they use it? This research aims to further investigate whether archivists are
104 using their auditing role as part of their professional practice.
There have been many years of discussion about changing skills and knowledge in
archival education (Anderson, 2007; Cox, 2006; Turner, 2008; Yakel, 2004). Several
researchers postulate the need for new roles and new skills for information
professionals, such as archivists, records managers and librarians, and recommend
increased technology content in education (Ataman, 2009; Ghetu, 2004). In Central
Europe some archival educators have integrated archival education into the field of
information science and there is a trend towards this specialization (Uhde, 2006).
Lybeck describes archival education in Scandinavia and argues that it is reasonable
that archival and information science are studied together considering Scandinavia’s
“holistic view” where records and archive management is intertwined (Lybeck, 2003).
The literature findings can be summed up, by stating that the transition from
paper-based to electronic records demands that a holistic perspective is applied on the
recordkeeping process. Strategic and proactive work is required in order to ensure that
electronic records is managed, maintained and preserved as long as it is needed.

Empirical study
The major findings related to each theme within the structured questionnaire will be
presented in the same order as in the questionnaire.
Background facts. The questions within this theme were designed to establish the
archivists’ status in the organization, years of service, education and background of the
professional choice (Table I).
Several interviewees have extended professional experiences as archivists. Even
though some of them are working at larger municipalities it is striking that three
interviewees are working alone without any colleagues. All the interviewees have
similar educational backgrounds in traditional academic fields like archeology, history
and political science, supplemented with courses in archival science, which is not
surprising if one considers the long professional working experience and the
traditional way in which archival science has developed over time. It is obvious that
several of the interviewees discovered their profession originally from a historical
interest, which often inspired their choice of academic studies.
Professional practice. The questions within this theme intended to establish the
current situation regarding the interviewees working performance and how they
identified themselves as professionals. The theme is dived into two sub-themes:
professional tasks including professional identity and auditing, and will be presented
in that order. Auditing is particularly interesting because it can be used as a powerful
tool to make the organization aware of the importance of record keeping.
What unites all of the interviewees is the mix of professional responsibilities:
.
managing and preserving the archives from different committees administrative
departments delivered to the archival authority and making them available by
systematic identification for the citizens and other authorities;

Informant Professional title
A Senior archivist
B Archivist (working alone
with one assistant)
C Archivist (working alone)
D Senior archivist with
personnel, finance and
business development
responsibilities
E Archivist (working alone)
F Archivist
G Senior archivist with
personnel, finance and
business development
responsibilities
H Senior archivist with
responsibility for projects for
business development
I IT archivist, working part-
time, 50 percent as project
manager for a long-term
preservation project
Background to the choice of
Years of service Education Organizational affiliation profession
16 Archeology, ethnology and Committee for culture and The archivist profession
literature supplemented with leisure with the city archives seemed interesting and via
courses in archival science as an independent different projects
administrative department
11 Archeology supplemented Does not emerge in the Interested in history
with courses in archival interview material
science
32 Courses in archival science Executive committee Interested in history
and some freestanding
courses but not in a complete
degree
21 Ethnology, archeology, and Committee for culture and Interested in history
history supplemented with leisure
courses in archival science
6 years, but only 2 History and information and Executive committee Interested in history
months at current media supplemented with
position courses in archival science
3 Months History and history of art Executive committee Interested in history
supplemented with courses in
archival science
30 Political science and history Executive committee Interested in political science
24 Archeology, history and Committee for culture with Worked as an archeologist
ethno geography the city archives as an but had difficulties finding
supplemented with one independent administrative full-time employment
course in archival science department
3 Data programmer, archival Committee for culture Interested in history and
science and digital long-term preservation issue
preservation
Archivists
profession in the

interviewed archivists
Presentation of the
105
digital age

Table I.
RMJ .
giving advice about recordkeeping to the committees administrative
departments;
22,2 .
working to develop retention and disposal schedules in collaboration with the
committees administrative departments; and
.
executing auditing on behalf of the archival authority.
106 It is obvious that there is a wide range of professional responsibilities, but what do the
interviewees consider to be their most important assignment if they have to prioritize?
The answer to that differs, but – the tendency is to give highest priority to ensuring
citizens’ right of access to official documents:
The most important assignment is to fulfill the public right to official document. It has to be
prioritized by law (Archivist F).
When my services are requested by the administrative departments – because it is about
organizing the information flow so that the right records are delivered to the Archival
authority in the end, which does not work today. Citizens’ right to official documents are also
prioritized because it is an obligation by law (Archivist E).
Archival descriptions have the highest priority because it is a working tool, but also a service
for the citizens (Archivist D).
Other interviewees with more resources are prioritizing development issues:
The most important assignment is to work large-scale development issues. It is much about
IT. It is important to see the clients’ needs and develop that area in order to make use of the
information. It is very much about finding methods for dealing with the enormous amount of
information that we have (Archivist H).
I would like to work 100 percent with long-term digital preservation (Archivist I).
It is about developing the business and operations in the right direction according to the
legislation (Archivist G).
All of the interviewees are working for the archival authority, which is the committee
to which they are affiliated. According to the Archive Act (SFS 1990:782) the archival
authority is responsible for auditing, which in practice is often conducted by archivists
delegated the archival authority. Auditing is another important assignment as the
following comment illustrates:
If you are working as a sole archivist, as many do, I think it is important to prioritize the
auditing role (Archivist A).
However, this seemed to be an area open for improvement, because even though all
interviewees consider it important and necessary, eight of nine archivists responded
that they lacked in resources – but sometimes also in skills for executing auditing
tasks. One archivist simply responded that no auditing is carried out:
I would rather look upon auditing as an internal control. Ultimately it is about creating good
practice and routines. As we are working in a well-established and functioning e-government,
I believe that the auditing role will be more important than ever before (Archivist D).
It is unclear whether one can use the strong statement “auditing”. I think it is a bit vague as to
whether I have that power. Indirectly it is so, but I wish it was clearer. It feels a little unclear
to me. It is disturbingly vague (Archivist E).
 We do not have a systematic auditing function today. However, we are part of the strategic Archivists
work with procurement of systems. We do not have enough resources to work with
everything. We are therefore prioritizing the strategic work (Archivist G). profession in the
digital age
I am the only IT-archivist and cannot keep up with the auditing (Archivist I).
But the double roles as advisor/auditor can also be problematic in situations when
strategic work means participating in projects at the same time as one have the role as 107
an auditor:
It can be hard to be part of strategic business development projects and have an auditing role
at the same time (Archivist A).
Some interviewees had thought about that issue and had suggestions for solutions:
Now I have come up with some new ideas for how we should work with auditing. I should
lead archive management control groups, which should work with overall goals. I cannot
work with both issues. The question is whether it would be better to have external auditing
instead and I could work with strategies setting up goal (Archivist B).
The idea is to present a digital long-term preservation strategy that can be used as a guideline
for auditing as well (Archivist I).
These local government archivists are professionally involved in several important
areas and therefore need a broad scale of skills. But how do they define their
professional identity? Is there a core of professional skills that makes them unique?
Several interviewees raised valuation of information over time and within its context
as an expression for professional uniqueness:
A holistic view on how to value and handle information (Archivist F).
Skills in analyzing information flows, including managing business information including
databases, yes – all information which are valuable to the organization that needs to be taken
care of, knowledge of information over time and use of information and to be able to value
information from a long-term preservation point-of-view (Archivist H).
Other interviewees also focused on the valuation of information over time, but added
the legislative framework as an important factor:
As archivists we have an important role as guardians of the legislative principle “the public
right to official documents and transparency”. The archivists need to ensure that
management of official documents is being done so that this can be fulfilled. If this is done,
cultural heritage is secured for the long-term. Archivists need to be able to make valuations of
what is important to keep for long- term preservation. Democracy and trustworthiness is
important (Archivist D).
An archivist must have a broad range of skills about legislation and appraisal of official
documents. Archivists must also have specific business knowledge in order to understand the
context in which the official documents are created or received (Archivist I).
Electronic recordkeeping. The questions in this theme were designed to find out to what
extent the transition from paper-based to electronic records has affected the archivists’
organizational positions and strategies. One of the questions was about whether the
interviewees work with electronic recordkeeping strategies. Several of the interviewees
were aware of the National Archives regulation on process based archival description
RMJ (RA-FS 2008:4; Riksarkivet, 2008), but only a few of them are working with mapping
22,2 processes even though they think it is important to be strategically involved in order to
ensure authentic records through time to fulfill legislative requirements (The Archive
Act SFS 1990:782; The Freedom of the Press Act SFS 1949:105). Often a lack of
resources is mentioned as an underlying cause:
I do not have much in the way of resources and it becomes problematic when attempting to
108 engage in business development projects when there is no time for it (Archivist B).

I assist the administrative departments with establishing retention and disposal schemes. But
I do not work with mapping processes. There is no time for strategic work (Archivist C).

At this moment we are working with archival descriptions for archives already transferred to
the Archival authority, which is important. We do not work with processes (Archivist D).
However, the transition from paper-based to electronic records has made it necessary
to work with setting or updating an overall policy including strategies on how this
work should be done, which four interviewees were currently working this. Three
interviewees already had such policies. The interviewees use the legislative framework
to motivate their professional performance and the need for recordkeeping strategies,
but – there seems to be less importance placed on using ISO standards (ISO 14721; ISO
23081-1; ISO/TR 26122; ISO 15489-1) as strategic working tools. However, archivist H
informed that a decision has been made about using the ISO 14721 standard within
procurement of a system for long-term preservation of information. The same archivist
also mentioned that the staff at the municipal archive had very good knowledge of the
standards’ contents. Instead of using ISO 23081 they had chosen to establish a
metadata scheme based on several different standards, adapted to local conditions.
Archivist I was also aware of the ISO 14721 standard and used it within an ongoing
project on digital long-term preservation. The same archivist referred to other
metadata standards rather than ISO 23081.
Of nine interviewees, four are part of an on-going project or strategic development
group within their own municipality, often in collaboration with IT-representatives,
registrars and managers from different administration departments. One municipal
archivist was also organizationally located together with a centralized registry
function, which had led to an increased professional exchange between archivists and
registrars. All interviewees are involved in some kind of regional or national network
pr project with other archival professionals representing local municipalities on the
issue of long-term-preservation of information.
On the question of there are established responsibility areas between the archival
authority and the other committees within the municipality regarding electronic
records, all the interviewees agreed, and several of them referred to established
retention and disposal schedules. However, six of nine interviewees stated that they did
not have routines for managing and keeping electronic records for long-term
preservation. In fact, they made a clear distinction between paper-based and electronic
records and argued that the electronic records were each committee’s responsibility:
There are clear boundaries between the archival authority and the other administrative
committees regarding responsibility: each administrative committee is responsible regardless
of the formats as long as the records are not delivered to the Archival authority. However,
 there is no long-term preservation solution for electronic records at the Archival authority Archivists
(Archivist D).
profession in the
Consequently, most of the committees’ electronic records that are kept in different digital age
business systems are never delivered for long-term preservation to the archival
authority, which the paper-based records usually are. Sometimes there are established
routines to print the electronic records and keep them on paper for long-term
preservation.
109
Skills development and the future role of the archivist profession. The aim of the
questions related to this topic was to establish and identify the interviewees’ need for
skills development. It was also important to capture their perceptions and visions on
the future professional role of archivists. The interviewees’ responses differed in terms
of need for skills development. Several highlighted the need for continuous skills
development in order to be updated in general but especially in systems science and
changes in legislation:
I need more information about applied system science and continuous skills development in
general and in legislation (Archivist F).

I need more knowledge about electronic long-term preservation, but also within legislation
(Archivist E).

General skills development is important. It is important to increase the academic level of

education and possibly to develop archival education to allow archivist to be specialists in
several areas. It is the complexity that is most important, not only electronic recordkeeping
(Archivist G).
The transition from traditional to electronic recordkeeping seems also to have raised
other important issues for knowledge enhancement:
The requirement to be more active and participating in various projects in collaboration with
IT-representatives means that we have to be able to meet in the terms of terminology used
(Archivist A).

To formulate and identify problems and be able to interpret what you see, which in practical
terms means that you can push things forward. Therefore, concept modeling is important.
Archivists describe functions and IT-representatives find solutions. It is important with
communication. It is the business need that is important and what should be in focus
(Archivist H).
All the interviewees were convinced that archivists are needed in the future, although
there are fragmented perceptions about the future professional role:
What we can contribute as archivists is to evaluate and classify information since we cannot
keep everything because then it becomes difficult to access what is important. We can make
demands on how information must be handled so that it can be trustworthy and sustainable
on long-term. We can argue that electronic long-term preservation is efficient in terms of
access and cost saving. The cultural heritage is a side effect (Archivist A).

Being an archivist in Sweden is great because there is no border between records

management and archives management. It is a huge advantage as an archivist to have a
holistic view. In ten years all will be IT-archivists (Archivist A).
RMJ Archivists as generalists – which is a very nice professional role – will have difficulties
surviving, especially if archivists are taking the issue of long-term preservation of
22,2 information seriously. The current working condition makes it impossible (Archivist B).
I think that the archival profession will become more differentiated. However, I think there
will always be a need for generalists who have a holistic view of information, what
information should be preserved and how to access the information and audit etc. But in
110 addition to the archivists there is a need for specialists, which are not necessarily educated
archivists. They may have skills in information technology (Archivist I).
Some interviewees thought that the profession would be divided into two types,
depending on a spectrum of skills, i.e. IT-archivists and traditional archivists:
In the future the archivist profession will be divided into IT-archivists and traditional
archivists. The foundation is still the same (Archivist C).
I think that the profession will be divided into traditional archivists and IT-archivists. But –
skills for keeping older records will still be needed. The archival profession is very broad and
that is also what makes it interesting (Archivist E).
Comments. In this theme the interviewees were invited to provide information in
addition to the interview questions already asked. Two archivists highlighted issues
related to higher education conducted by universities:
There is a need for an academy or a common knowledge bank of good methods of practice
(Archivist B).
Research can assist and support archivists and the authorities with studies on identifying
problems, finding methods and solutions particularly on the issue of how to handle
fragmented information (Archivist H).
These remarks confirm that there is an important link between professional
development, research and practice. The comments are good examples of how
professional research and practice can cross-fertilize each other.

Discussion and conclusions

The findings presented above provided an opportunity to analyze the relationship
between the transition from paper-based to electronic records and archivists’ current
and future professional role. The study aimed to establish if and how electronic
recordkeeping within e-government development has affected the archivists’
professional status, e.g. positions and practice within public organizations?
All the interviewees were working with the archival authorities in their
municipalities and had a range of professional tasks. All considered valuation of
information over time and within its context to be an expression of archivists’
professional uniqueness. Knowledge of the legislative framework was furthermore
considered to be important. There seemed to be a strong awareness that archivists
should work pro-actively in order to understand what has to be done to capture a
record and fix it in its context of creation so it can be recalled, re-presented and
distributed. Therefore, they support related research that recordkeeping competence
needs to be represented strategically, including high-level support, within
organizations, and in the work with the processes in order to achieve that. But it is
problematic that the interviewees claim they do not have enough resources to work
more strategically, which, for example, means participating in business development Archivists
projects, mapping processes and procurement of systems. There are some exceptions. profession in the
The situation in Swedish local governments seems to be similar to that in the UK
(Barata, 2004; Shepherd et al., 2009). digital age
However, several interviewees preferred to work with tasks connected to
paper-based archives in repositories. The fact that most of the committees makes a
distinction between handling paper-based and electronic records binds the archivists 111
to the paper-based archives alone since electronic records kept in business systems are
never delivered for long-term preservation. Actually, it seems that several of the
interviewees are waiting for an invitation to participate instead of working pro-actively
to reach strategic positions and visualize themselves as recordkeeping experts.
Auditing can be a powerful tool to endeavor to achieve more strategic positions.
Auditing is being conducted in order to fulfill legislate demands on recordkeeping. If
this is neglected it can lead to democratic consequences, e.g. citizens rights of access to
official documents. However, eight of nine archivists responded that they lacked in
resources and sometimes in skills how to do that. The findings show that even if the
interviewees have an auditing role they may choose not to exercise it because of the
lack of resources and skills. Sometimes it felt problematic having the double role as
advisor/auditor when participating in development projects. They often felt a conflict
doing so.
Overall, the interviewees thought of archivists as currently being generalists and
believed that archivists as professionals would be needed in the future. On the other
hand several interviewees postulated that the archival profession would probably
divide into two professional types: traditional archivists and IT-archivists. However,
none of the interviewees wanted to change the archivist title, the archivist title seemed
to be very connected to the professional performance and skills. They highlighted the
need for general skills development, but focused in particular on long-term
preservation and legislation.
Several interviewees also addressed the need for other important issues related to
new requirements, as a result of electronic recordkeeping implementation and the need
for collaborative work with IT-professionals:
.
concept modeling;
.
communication strategies;
.
business process development;
.
management;
.
communication; and
.
marketing.

The findings confirm a need of changing skills and knowledge in archival education
and a need for increased technology. This supports arguments that archival and
information science should be studied together with consideration to Scandinavia’s
“holistic view” where records and archive management is intertwined.
The research findings can be summed up by stating that it is clear that there is a
connection between the interviewees’ resources and how they prioritized their work,
and the maturity of their collaboration with other professionals in strategic work.
Archivists with better resources prioritize development issues. There is a lack of skills
RMJ and resources to work with electronic records individually, but also in collaboration
22,2 with other professionals which affect prioritizing of work; there is a need for
specialized skills, which seems to be related to the broad range of responsibilities and
electronic recordkeeping; auditing is often not carried out, which can lead to
information loss and democratic consequences for the citizens right to official
documents, and finally, higher education has an important role in supporting the
112 practice with research that strengthen the archivist profession in defining problems
and develop new working methods. Even though Swedish archivists claim to cover
records management as well as archives management, it seems that they do not really
cover it in practice.
Since the municipalities are proactive in implementing electronic recordkeeping, the
result is even more striking, that there is a clear unawareness within the organizations
of the importance of recordkeeping competence as being of paramount importance in
e-government development. Archivists do not have any major influence on strategies
for e-government development, so their autonomous functions as professionals are
minimized. When archivists lose professional status it opens up possibilities for other
professional groups to replace them: professions who have the power to communicate
the challenges identified, and to present solutions. If this happens, archivists risk
becoming marginalized as custodians of paper-based historical records in repositories.
Archivists cannot wait until they obtain more resources – they actually have to
claim their positions, and a possible way to achieve this is by exercising their mandate
as auditors. The way forward could be to strengthen the profession by giving them
appropriate skills and working tools and methods adapted to meet the requirements of
electronic recordkeeping, such as developing models for auditing. The core of
knowledge needs to be nourished and explored.

References
Anderson, K. (2007), “Education and training for records professionals”, Records Management
Journal, Vol. 17 No. 2, pp. 94-106.
Asproth, V., Borglund, E., Samuelsson, G. and Öberg, L.-M. (2010), “E-tjänstens framtida historia
– informationsbevarande, ett bortglömt ansvarsområde?” (“The future history of
e-services – long-term preservation, a forgotten area of responsibility?”), in
K. Lindblad-Gidlund, A. Ekelin, S. Eriksén and A. Ranerup (Eds), Förvaltning och
medborgarskap i förändring (Governance and Citizenship in Transition), Studentlitteratur,
Lund, pp. 167-184.
Ataman, B.K. (2009), “Requirements for information professionals in a digital environment: some
thoughts”, Program: electronic library and information systems, Vol. 43 No. 2, pp. 215-28.
Barata, K. (2004), “Archives in the digital age”, Journal of the Society of Archivists, Vol. 25 No. 1,
pp. 63-70.
Choksy, C.E.B. (2008), “Where RM should report to ensure effective electronic records
management”, The Information Management Journal, March/April, pp. 58-61.
Chun, S.A., Shulman, S., Sandoval, R. and Hovy, E. (2010), “Government 2.0: making connections
between citizens, data and government”, Information Polity, Vol. 15, pp. 1-9.
Cox, R.J. (2006), “Are there really new directions and innovations in archival education?”,
Archival Science, Vol. 6, pp. 247-61.
Dionne, M. and Carboni, A. (2009), “How to successfully implement an e-records management
program”, Information Management, March/April, pp. 49-53.
Dollar, C.M. (1992), Archival Theory and Information Technologies, The University of Macerata, Archivists
Macerata.
Evans, D. and Yen, C.D. (2005), “E-government: an analysis for implementation: framework for
profession in the
understanding cultural and social impact”, Government Information Quarterly, Vol. 22, digital age
pp. 354-73.
Evetts, J. (1999), “Professional identity, strategy and change”, in Hellberg, I., Saks, M. and
Benoit, C. (Eds), Professional Identities in Transition, Department of Sociology, Göteborg 113
University, Göteborg, pp. 13-26.
Fang, Z. (2002), “E-government in digital era: concept, practice and development”, International
Journal of the Computer, the Internet and Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 1-22.
Fountain, J.E. (2001), Building the Virtual State – Information Technology and Institutional
Change, The Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC.
Ghetu, M. (2004), “Two professions, one goal”, The Information Management Journal, May/June,
pp. 62-6.
Hofman, H. (2005), “The archive”, in McKemmish, S., Piggot, M., Reed, B. and Upward, F. (Eds),
Archives: Recordkeeping in Society, Centre for Information Studies, Charles Sturt
University, Wagga Wagga, pp. 131-58.
Holme, I.M. and Krohn Solvang, B. (1997), Forskningsmetodik – Om kvalitativa och kvantitativa
metoder, (Research Methodology – About Qualitative and Quantitative Methods), 2nd ed.,
Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Hurley, C. (2005), “Recordkeeping and accountability”, in McKemmish, S., Piggot, M., Reed, B.
and Upward, F. (Eds), Archives: Recordkeeping in Society, Centre for Information Studies,
Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga, pp. 223-53.
Kahn, R.A. (2004), “Records management & compliance – making the connection”, The
Information Management Journal, May/June, pp. 28-36.
Kallberg, M. (2010), “E-government development and recordkeeping: a comparative study of
e-government best practice in Swedish municipalities”, iRMA Information and Records
Management Annual 2010, Records and Information Management Professionals
Australasia, pp. 83-94.
Lybeck, J. (2003), “Archival education in Scandinavia”, Archival Science, Vol. 3, pp. 97-116.
McDonald, J. (2010), “Records management and data management: closing the gap”, Records
Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 1, pp. 53-60.
McKemmish, S. (2001), “Placing records continuum theory and practice”, Archival Science, Vol. 1
No. 4, pp. 333-59.
Myburgh, S. (2005), “Records management and archives: finding common ground”, The
Information Management Journal, March/April, pp. 24-9.
Riksarkivet (2008), Riksarkivets föreskrifter om ändring i Riksarkivets Föreskrifter och allmänna
råd (RA-FS 1991:1) om arkiv hos statliga myndigheter (National Archives Regulations and
Guidelines for Government Agencies), RA-FS 2008:4, Riksarkivet, Stockholm.
Riksarkivet (2009), Riksarkivets föreskrifter och allmänna råd om elektroniska handlingar
(upptagningar för automatiserad behandling) (National Archives Regulations and
Guidelines on Electronic Records), RA-FS 2009:1, Riksarkivet, Stockholm.
Riksarkivet (2010), Rapport rörande enkätundersökning – myndigheters hantering av elektroniska
handlingar ((National Archives Report Presenting the Result of a Conducted Survey about
Government Agencies’ Electronic Records Management)), Riksarkivet, Stockholm.
Runardotter, M. (2007), “Information technology, archives and archivists – and long-term digital
preservation”, Arkiv, samhälle och forskning, No. 2, pp. 26-41.
RMJ Runardotter, M., Quisbert, H., Nilsson, J., Hägerfors, A. and Mirijamsdotter, A. (2006), “The
information life cycle – issues in long-term digital preservation”, Arkiv, samhälle och
22,2 forskning, No. 1, pp. 17-29.
Shepherd, E., Stevenson, A. and Flinn, A. (2009), “The impact of freedom of information on
records management and record use in local government: a literature review”, Journal of
the Society of Archivists, Vol. 30 No. 2, October, pp. 227-48.
114 (The) Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (2010), available at: www.skl.se/
web/e-forvaltning.aspx (accessed 10 August, 2010).
(The) Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (2011), available at: www.skl.se/
kommuner_och_landsting (accessed 3 October, 2011).
(The) Swedish Standards Institute SS-ISO 15489-1 (2001), Information and Documentation –
Records Management, SIS Förlag AB, Stockholm.
Trost, J. (2005), Kvalitativa intervjuer ((Qualitative Interviews)), Studentlitteratur, Lund.
Turner, M.D. (2008), “Educational programmes in archives and records management in the UK
and Ireland: an overview, 1995-2007”, Journal of the Society of Archivists, Vol. 29 No. 1,
pp. 73-82.
Uhde, K. (2006), “New education in old Europe”, Archival Science, Vol. 6, pp. 193-203.
Upward, F. (2005), “The records continuum”, in McKemmish, S., Piggot, M., Reed, B. and
Upward, F. (Eds), Archives: Recordkeeping in Society, Centre for Information Studies,
Charles Sturt University, Wagga Wagga.
Warner, J. and Chun, A.S. (2009), “Privacy protection in government mashups”, Information
Polity, Vol. 14, pp. 75-90.
Weller-Collison, A., Kahn, R.A. and Wescott, W.L. (2008), “Skills for building success in the
electronic business environment”, The Information Management Journal,
September/October, pp. 50-8.
Yakel, E. (2000), “Knowledge management: the archivist’s and records manager’s perspective”,
The Information Management Journal, July, pp. 24-30.
Yakel, E. (2004), “Educating archival professionals in the twenty-first century”, Archives and
Manuscripts, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 152-4.

Further reading
International Organization for Standardization (2003), ISO 14721:2003, Space Data and
Information Transfer Systems – Open Archival Information System – Reference Model,
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
International Organization for Standardization (2006), ISO 23081-1:2006, Information and
Documentation, Records Management Processes, Metadata for Records, Part 1: Principles,
International Organization for Standardization, Geneva.
International Organization for Standardization (2008), ISO/TR 26122:2008, Information and
Documentation, Work Process Analysis for Records, International Organization for
Standardization, Geneva.

About the author

Maria Kallberg commenced as a PhD student in May 2009 at the Department for Information
Technology and Media, Mid Sweden University, researching in the Center for Digital
Information Management. Her research objectives are to develop new knowledge that can guide
the archival profession to improve their professional development to meet new challenges
regarding organizational changes and the shift from traditional recordkeeping to digital
recordkeeping. Maria Kallberg can be contacted at: maria.kallberg@miun.se
Appendix Archivists
profession in the
digital age

115

Figure A1.
Questionnaire
attachment 1

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com

Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints