But this one lingered.

Legal started pulling threads. And the deeper they dug, the worse it got. Emails missing. Documents gone cold. Files vanished without a trace, and no one who could say when, why, or who pulled the trigger.

What should have been routine turned into something else entirely: a credibility problem with teeth.

Defensible Disposition Key Takeaways:

• Defensibility is proven through consistent execution and documentation, not just a written policy.
• Addressing redundant, obsolete, and trivial (ROT) data is critical to reducing discovery costs and legal risk.
• Effective retention schedules require specific, trackable trigger events to ensure records aren’t kept indefinitely.
• Regular internal audits and documented destruction certificates are the primary evidence used to defend disposition actions.

Most organizations have a retention policy. On paper, at least. But when you look closer, the story changes. Fewer have developed a comprehensive defensible disposition framework, and that gap is where the trouble starts. Deleting records without a consistent process, proper authorization, and clear documentation might feel like routine cleanup, but it can look very different under the harsh light of legal scrutiny. Defensible disposition is the framework that ensures your organization lawfully and consistently destroys eligible records and non-records with a paper trail that holds up when the questions come.

What is Defensible Disposition?

Defensible disposition isn’t a single event. It’s a framework. One that either holds together under pressure… or doesn’t. It is the output of interlocking processes that must work together including a legally sound retention schedule, policies that cover everything you create (not just official records), consistent implementation across your systems and paper, regular auditing to catch drift, a solid litigation hold process, and a plan for when something goes wrong.

6 Step Defensible Disposition Framework

Step 1: Build a Retention Schedule You Can Actually Implement

Every disposition decision traces back to your retention schedule. If it’s incomplete, outdated, or impractical to apply, everything built on top of it becomes shaky.

First, it needs to reflect your organization, not a one-size-fits-all approach. Templates won’t capture the specifics of how you operate. If you manufacture regulated products, manage assets, or operate in a specialized or licensed environment, your schedule should reflect that. Just as important, it has to be written in a way your employees can navigate quickly. If people can’t find what they’re looking for, they won’t use it, and unclassified records quickly become unmanaged ones.

Second, it must account for the jurisdictions you operate in. Retention requirements vary widely, and organizations often underestimate how those differences stack up. In many cases, you’ll need to apply the most stringent requirement across jurisdictions or explicitly define exceptions. And this isn’t a “set it and forget it” exercise, laws and guidance change. A schedule that was accurate a year ago may already be outdated. Build regular review into your governance process and rely on current legal research, not static references.

Finally, every retention rule needs to be workable. That means clearly defining both the retention period and the trigger event that starts the clock. “Seven years for contracts” isn’t enough. Seven years from when? Execution? Expiration? Last activity? If the trigger isn’t clear, people fill in the gaps. And they don’t all fill them in the same way. And if the trigger can’t be tracked reliably, records tend to be kept indefinitely. A good test is simple: can your systems consistently identify the trigger date without requiring judgment calls?

Step 2: Beyond Records: Controlling ROT and Non-Record Content

Not everything your organization creates qualifies as a record. But that doesn’t mean it’s harmless. Left unmanaged, non-record content becomes its own kind of risk. Your Records and Information Management policy or your Retention Schedule needs to address this explicitly.

A major category here is ROT: redundant, obsolete, and trivial content. Think of duplicate files, outdated drafts, and low-value communications. Left unchecked, ROT increases discovery costs, slows systems, and makes it harder to find what matters. For many organizations, the biggest contributor is everyday communication. Emails, chats, and messages that serve a short-term purpose and then linger indefinitely. Your policy should define transitory, redundant, obsolete, and trivial content, explain when it is not treated as a record, and specify how routine deletion is authorized and carried out.

Not all information exists as documents, either. Data in systems like CRMs, ERPs, and databases don’t fit neatly into traditional retention categories. This is where process-driven retention comes into play. Instead of focusing on document types, you look at the business process behind the data and determine retention based on that. Your policy should map key systems to the processes they support, assign ownership, and define how disposition decisions are made and documented. If you don’t address this, large portions of your data environment remain effectively unmanaged.

Step 3: From Policy to Practice: Driving Adoption

A policy doesn’t matter if no one follows it. Defensibility isn’t about what’s written down. It’s about what actually happens day to day. That means embedding it in the systems where records live and supporting it with a repeatable process.

Start with individual-access systems like email, OneDrive, and local machines. These are often the least controlled environments, and they’re where both over-retention and accidental loss happen most frequently. You need clarity. What’s automated. What’s the user’s responsibility. And how you verify both. Because telling people what to do isn’t the same as making sure they do it.

Structured environments like SharePoint, document management systems, shared drives should be easier to control. In theory. In practice, they often aren’t. Sites multiply, structures drift, and retention controls aren’t applied consistently. Effective implementation means applying classification and retention rules at the point of creation or ingestion, not trying to clean things up later at scale. Periodic reviews help confirm that content is landing where it should and that outdated material is being removed as expected. And don’t forget paper records.

Paper records shouldn’t be overlooked. They carry the same legal weight as digital records, and they need to be included in your processes for storage, retrieval, and destruction. Otherwise, you’ve got a blind spot.

When records reach the end of the line, disposition follows a process. No guesswork. No shortcuts.

• Identify what’s eligible.
• Confirm the details.
• Get the right approval.
• Carry out destruction.
• Document everything.

That documentation, often in the form of a destruction certificate, is critical evidence that the process was followed properly.

Effective records management isn’t just about compliance, it directly benefits users when they understand its value. With strong training and ongoing communication, organizations can move beyond “check-the-box” habits and show how good practices save time, reduce risk, and make information easier to find. When users see how records management supports their daily work, they’re more likely to adopt it. The goal is to make it not just a requirement, but a clear advantage.

Step 4: Audit Before Someone Else Starts Asking Questions

A program that looks good on paper isn’t enough. You need to know it’s actually working. Regular audits are what turn policy into something defensible.

Formal audits should review how the retention schedule is being applied, whether records are stored appropriately, whether disposition workflows are followed, and whether documentation is consistently maintained. Findings should be tracked and resolved, and the audit trail itself becomes part of your compliance record.

Between formal audits, targeted spot checks can be just as valuable. Instead of trying to review everything, focus on specific systems, teams, or record types. For example, you might verify that retention labels in Microsoft 365 haven’t been altered, or that a newly onboarded group is correctly classifying records. These smaller checks help catch issues early, often before they become larger problems.

It also makes sense to trigger reviews based on events, not just schedules. System migrations, acquisitions, or major staffing changes are all points where governance can slip.

Step 5: Don’t Forget Litigation Holds

When litigation is reasonably anticipated, the clock starts ticking, whether anything’s been filed or not. At that point, routine deletion isn’t routine anymore. It stops. Routine disposition must be suspended for information within the hold’s scope until the hold is released.

Hold notices need to:

• Go out quickly;
• Be clear enough to act on;
• Be tracked so you know they were received and understood.

For ongoing matters, periodic reminders are standard.

Scope is a common weakness. A proper hold covers not just official records, but drafts, communications, and anything else that could be relevant. It also needs to be implemented at the system level. Automated deletions and lifecycle policies won’t stop on their own. They have to be explicitly suspended.

When the matter ends, the hold should be formally lifted and normal processes restored, with that transition documented just as carefully as the hold itself.

Step 6: When Things Go Wrong (Because Sometimes They Do)

Even well-designed programs run into issues. Missed holds, premature deletions, or system errors. What matters is how those situations are handled.

• The first step is to stop any related destruction and secure what remains.
• Then bring in the right stakeholders, often including legal, before taking action. Trying to fix things too quickly without proper guidance can make the situation worse.
• From there, conduct a documented investigation to understand what happened, when, and why.
• Determining whether the issue was inadvertent or intentional is critical, as that distinction carries different consequences. In some cases, the question of whether to self-report will arise. That decision typically sits with legal counsel, but in general, organizations that identify and address issues proactively tend to be viewed more favorably than those where problems emerge later through external discovery.
• Once resolved, address the root cause and document the fix.

That record becomes part of your overall compliance story.

Defensible Disposition Framework: Bringing It All Together

At its core, defensible disposition is about accountability. Knowing what you kept. What you destroyed. When it happened. And why. Because sooner or later, someone’s going to ask. And when they do, it won’t be about policy. It’ll be about proof. Being able to explain what you kept, what you destroyed, when it happened, and why. That doesn’t come from a single policy or tool, it comes from consistent execution over time.

The challenge isn’t just building the defensible disposition framework. It’s maintaining it through system changes, staff turnover, and competing priorities. And that’s exactly the point. You’re both building this for routine operations and for the moment when someone comes knocking, asking you to explain a record that no longer exists. When that happens, your documentation, your processes, and your consistency are what determine whether it’s a routine matter or something much more serious.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post What It Takes to Make Record Deletion Truly Defensible appeared first on Zasio.

In organizations today, paper records can be as absent as Dictaphones and fax machines. In their place lie complex digital ecosystems, constantly churning and being updated. These ecosystems often cross continents. Within this transformed landscape, records and information management professionals must also adapt. Retention schedules built around documents, even digital ones, are no longer enough to keep organizations compliant with retention and disposition laws. If a digital system can generate a regulated record on demand—or even if it merely contains regulated data—then the system itself must be part of the retention equation. In other words, retention decisions that ignore digital systems create false confidence in your RIM compliance.

The job of RIM professionals now requires data management.

Key Takeaways:

• Traditional RIM focused on static objects; modern RIM focuses on dynamic digital ecosystems.
• Process-driven retention manages the systems and data flows that generate records, not just the records themselves.
• Keeping underlying transactional data while deleting a record creates a “false confidence” in compliance.
• Success requires RIM professionals to master data mapping, system architecture, and cross-departmental collaboration.

The Future of Retention is Process-Driven

It’s helpful to think of computing systems as factories and records as the products being manufactured. It doesn’t matter if you’ve disposed of the end product when the raw material is still on the factory floor and can be used to create another same or a similar record. Under a process-driven retention approach, RIM professionals must focus on how data flows through systems and business processes, recognizing that records are often generated, regenerated, or reconstructed from underlying data long after a record is deleted. Process-driven retention shifts from managing documents to managing the processes and systems that process regulated content.

If an organization determines it must delete a financial report or a customer statement, but it keeps the underlying transactional database, the risk driving the disposition decision has merely been taped over.  In other words, you cannot claim compliance at the record level if the underlying data ecosystem still exists to recreate, substantially reconstruct, or functionally reissue the record.

Process-driven retention builds around the fact that data doesn’t stay in a static state. It’s instead constantly changing. Process-driven retention also appreciates that datasets are often dependent on other datasets to be meaningful. Accordingly, the process-driven RIM professional must recognize that retention outcomes must be determined by system behavior, not just by deleting isolated datapoints. A modern RIM program must be as much about how data systems behave as it is about how long records are kept.

Process-Driven Retention Requires RIM Professionals to be Curious

To adopt a process-driven retention mindset, RIM professionals must elevate their understanding of computing systems and technologies. They must learn new skills and domains. These include data mapping, IT system architecture, and data lifecycles. RIM professionals must begin thinking in terms of the retention implications of computing system event logs, audit trails, system metadata, data pipelines, and even “machine memory” in AI systems.

Process-driven retention also requires creating closer partnerships with privacy, IT, product and engineering teams, and cybersecurity professionals. In a process-driven retention world, these are the RIM professionals’ new cross-collaborators. RIM professionals must be the glue that binds these diverse fields to help their organizations achieve retention and disposition compliance.

New Questions for a New Era of Retention Management

The distinction between “Data,” “information,” and “record” was long an object of worship in the RIM field. Unless the object was a record, RIM professionals need not have been concerned. Such thinking is outmoded. In the process-driven retention age, RIM professionals must think fluidly, thinking through the retention implications of data in all of its forms.

RIM professionals must also shift their focus from classification to system comprehension. Instead of merely asking, “Is this a record?” the RIM professional’s most important question must now be “Show me how this works?”

Additional Resources

To learn more about Zasio’s approach to records retention management, check out our February 2026 Virtual Coffee Webinar with Jennifer Chadband, Warren Bean, and Rick Surber, as well as this written compendium.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post How Process-Driven Retention is Changing Records and Information Management appeared first on Zasio.

In litigation, records are not background material. They are evidence. And evidence carries consequences.

When a lawsuit begins, one of the first formal steps is discovery. Discovery requires organizations to produce relevant emails, messages, drafts, reports, and metadata. Opposing counsel does not begin by reading your retention policy. They begin by examining what exists, what is missing, and whether the organization followed its own rules.

As a former trial attorney, I learned quickly that documentation practices often determine outcomes more than dramatic testimony does. An offhand message, a missing file, or irregular deletion can shape credibility long before opening statements begin.

That experience clarified something essential. The purpose of a records and information management solution is not administrative efficiency. It is defensibility. The issue is rarely whether an organization had a policy. The issue is whether it followed that policy when it mattered.

Key Takeaways:

• Shift to Records Management Defensibility: In litigation, your records are evidence, not just administrative files. A judge evaluates your systems based on whether you followed a consistent, repeatable process.
• The Liability of “Keep Everything”: Over-retention expands your discovery footprint, increases legal costs, and creates unnecessary risks during a data breach.
• Consistency is Your Best Defense: Courts don’t penalize organizations for following a reasonable, pre-established retention schedule. They do scrutinize selective or irregular cleanup performed under the shadow of litigation.

How Discovery Tests Your Records Management System

Discovery does more than gather documents. It tests systems. Regulators and opposing counsel approach it with three key questions:

1. Did the organization preserve relevant information once it reasonably anticipated litigation?
2. Did it follow routine practices before that point?
3. Do any gaps suggest unmanaged systems or selective deletion?

In practice, those questions appear in everyday situations:

• A leadership team discusses a major decision in a messaging app, but no one preserves those conversations when a dispute arises.
• An employee deletes text messages, unaware that the issue has already escalated.
• Multiple versions of a contract circulate by email, but no one can identify the final draft.
• A company thinks it has a written policy, yet no one can locate a record of its approval.

None of these situations seem extraordinary until someone asks about them under oath.

How does a judge view missing business records?

Judges do not expect perfection. They expect reasonableness and good faith. Organizations demonstrate that standard through repeatable processes, not polished policy language. When execution lacks consistency, even innocent gaps raise questions. Those questions increase cost, scrutiny, and risk.

Why “Keep Everything” is a Liability

Many organizations assume that keeping all information indefinitely reduces exposure. Leaders believe it is safer to keep everything than to risk deleting something that might later be requested.

In practice, unlimited retention expands risk.

What is the risk of keeping records too long?

When organizations keep more data, they broaden discovery. Broader discovery increases review time, legal costs, and the chance that someone isolates statements from their original context. Redundant drafts and informal communications multiply the material teams must review and explain.

Over-retention also creates operational drag. When everything is saved, nothing is prioritized:

• Employees spend more time searching for the right version of a document.
• Critical information gets buried in outdated files.
• Systems slow.

Storage may be inexpensive. The consequences of excess are not.

The risks extend beyond litigation. The more information an organization keeps, the more it must secure. Sensitive contracts, employee records, personal data, and confidential communications can remain accessible long after they serve a purpose. If a breach occurs, exposure expands with the volume stored.

Defensible deletion strengthens position. Disciplined governance does not destroy evidence—it enforces policy. Courts do not penalize organizations for following a reasonable retention schedule. They do scrutinize selective or irregular cleanup.

The distinction matters. Every retained document can become a witness.

Common Pitfalls in Corporate Information Governance

Risk rarely comes from dramatic misconduct. It grows from small, ordinary gaps that no one thought would matter.

Many organizations manage records responsibly. At the same time, new technologies and decentralized communication add complexity.

Teams make business decisions in messaging and collaboration tools, but those conversations are not always preserved in a searchable way. Managers send texts or use personal devices for convenience. Employees forward work to personal email accounts. Business records are created outside official systems.

Disposition presents another challenge. Organizations often keep records that should be deleted because someone believes they might prove useful someday. Old drafts and unnecessary files build up. Over time, temporary exceptions become permanent practice.

AI adds another layer of complexity. AI tools generate drafts and analyses quickly, and the records questions are not yet settled. Consider a scenario where a team uses an AI tool to draft a legal summary, then revises it through several iterations—if a dispute arises, the organization may struggle to explain which version governed a decision, who reviewed it, and where the prompts and outputs are stored. Governance continues to evolve, but disputes already involve AI-assisted content.

These patterns often go unnoticed until litigation begins. At that point, organizations must explain why certain information was kept indefinitely while other records cannot be located. They must show when preservation began and demonstrate that deletion followed established timelines rather than reacting to scrutiny.

Uncertainty weakens position. Consistency strengthens it.

Litigation-Ready Governance in Practice

Preparing for litigation does not mean assuming it will happen. It means building systems that hold up if it does.

Organizations strengthen defensibility when they tie retention periods to clear drivers such as legal requirements, contractual obligations, or operational need. If asked why a category is kept for a specific period, leaders should have a clear answer. Not a guess.

They must also define preservation triggers clearly. When a dispute arises, employees need to understand what changes and what they must preserve. Consistent disposition remains essential. A defensible program includes regular deletion that follows established timelines. Irregular cleanup creates far more exposure than disciplined retention.

Organizations must govern high-impact communication channels intentionally. If leaders make critical decisions in chat or collaboration tools, the organization must apply the same rigor it applies to email and shared drives. Executives should understand how isolated messages may be interpreted years later, outside their original context.

These measures are not abstract ideals. They are safeguards that influence litigation outcomes.

Credibility Is the Real Asset

In litigation, credibility carries weight.

An organization that can demonstrate a clear retention rationale, consistent execution, and a functioning preservation process begins from a position of strength. An organization that cannot explain its practices begins at a disadvantage. Records governance is not administrative overhead. It is litigation posture.

Where Experience Matters

Designing a litigation-ready records program requires understanding how others examine policies under pressure. It requires anticipating the questions they will ask and the inconsistencies they may challenge.

At Zasio, we help organizations evaluate retention frameworks, assess preparedness, and align policy with operational reality. We focus not only on compliance but on defensibility.

Once litigation begins, records no longer function solely as internal tools. They become evidence that speaks for the organization. The only question is whether your organization’s records management software can withstand scrutiny when ordinary emails are elevated to courtroom exhibits.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post What a Trial Lawyer Knows About Defensible Records Management appeared first on Zasio.

As organizations grapple with exploding data volumes, evolving privacy laws, and increasingly complex systems, one thing is clear. Old methods can’t keep up. Process‑driven retention offers a path forward.

What is Process-Driven Retention?

Process-driven retention is a strategic information governance framework that determines data lifecycles based on business processes and data dependencies rather than static, document-centric records.

Why Traditional Retention No Longer Works

For decades, retention programs were built around one deceptively simple question: Can I destroy this record? It was a world of self‑contained documents, straightforward classifications, and predictable lifecycles.

But that world is gone.

Modern organizations operate in an environment where:

• Data is no longer self‑contained.
• Information is generated continuously across systems.
• Records are often reconstructed, not stored as static objects.
• Retention schedules rarely cover all the data an organization touches.

This disconnect has opened a gap between what retention schedules say and what actual business processes require.

The Data Explosion Changed the Rules

Data today is not merely an output, it’s the raw material that organizations process, refine, and reuse. The line between “data,” “information,” and “record” is now fluid:

• Data: raw, unstructured bits.
• Information: data given meaning.
• Records: documented evidence of activities.

Traditional schedules were built to manage records, not the sprawling ecosystems of structured and unstructured data that now feed them. So, organizations are increasingly forced to ask: What do we keep? What counts as a record?

These questions aren’t academic. They shape compliance, risk, and efficiency.

Then Privacy Changed the Rules Again

As privacy mandates gained strength, they introduced obligations that frequently conflict with retention requirements. Among the new challenges:

• Right to be forgotten obligations
• Mandatory deletion maximums
• Conflicts with statutory retention minimums
• Data dependencies across systems
• Requirements not covered by most retention schedules

In other words: it’s no longer enough to know when you can delete something. You have to know when you must.

Enter Process‑Driven Retention

Process‑driven retention reframes the conversation around context. Rather than evaluating a piece of information as a standalone object, it looks at how that information flows, transforms, and supports business operations.

It asks not just what the data is, but:

• Who generates it
• Who processes it
• Where it is stored
• What activities rely on it
• What privacy, security, and legal obligations affect it
• What upstream and downstream dependencies bind it

This approach breaks down silos and reveals the true lifecycle of data—not just the record‑keeping lifecycle.

What Makes This Approach Different

Process‑driven retention is:

• Purpose‑driven rather than content‑driven
• Holistic and fabric-oriented, not siloed
• Metadata aware, using context as an asset
• Structured around dependencies, not isolated artifacts
• Supportive of both privacy and operational requirements

It connects the dots across teams such as legal, IT, records management, operations, privacy and creating shared visibility into the data landscape.

Real‑World Examples in Action

The webinar walked through scenarios that highlight the value of process‑driven thinking:

1. Energy Consumption Data in Utilities

Hourly energy logs feed billing, outage reports, efficiency analyses, and forecasting. They also intersect with marketing, customer success, and project management processes. Deleting logs isn’t just a retention question, it’s an operational one.

2. Time Clock Logs in HR

Clock‑in/out data drives timesheets, pay slips, benefits eligibility, PTO management, and performance reviews. The decision to delete this data has far‑reaching implications.

Implementing Process‑Driven Retention

Transitioning to this modern model requires organizational commitment. The webinar outlined key steps:

• Form a cross‑functional steering committee
• Conduct risk and dependency analyses
• Revisit policies and retention schedules
• Map systems and data flows
• Aggregate data where possible
• Align onboarding and offboarding processes across systems

It’s a foundational shift, but one with significant payoffs. Greater compliance clarity, reduced risk, and more resilient information governance overall.

Looking Ahead

As data complexity grows, retention programs must evolve to match. Process‑driven retention equips organizations to manage information with nuance, context, and foresight. It’s not simply a new technique. It’s a modern mindset for a modern data world.

If you’d like guidance on adopting a process‑driven approach, our team is here to help.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance consulting. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post Beyond Records: Why the Future of Retention Is Process Driven appeared first on Zasio.

Despite the convenience of digitization, some records must remain in physical form. Whether for compliance, legal verification, or operational necessity, paper documents support business continuity. And when digital systems go down, physical records provide an essential backup.

The Value of Physical Records

Many industries require certain documents to be retained in their original form. Wet signatures, notarized contracts, and archival materials often carry legal weight that digital copies cannot replicate. Paper – when stored appropriately – can outlast many digital formats. File types, software systems, and storage devices become obsolete, but properly archived physical documents remain readable for ages.

Physical records may also be vital for disaster recovery. Offsite storage ensures that critical documents remain protected from localized threats and can be retrieved quickly if primary offices are damaged or inaccessible.

One threat to digital records is hacking. Hackers can compromise networks through various avenues, including phishing emails, outdated software, or weak or leaked credentials. Once inside, they may deploy ransomware that locks users out, halts operations, and holds data for ransom. This not only causes downtime and financial loss but also erodes customer trust. To help mitigate these risks, organizations should maintain a physical copy of their business continuity and disaster recovery plan onsite. This ensures your BCDR plan remains available if digital systems are compromised.

Risks to Hard Copy Records

Physical records are not without vulnerabilities. Physical records may be destroyed or damaged through natural disasters like fires, floods, and earthquakes. Environment also influences whether physical records remain safe. Humidity, mold, light exposure, and pests can degrade or destroy records.

Security threats aren’t limited to digital systems. Unauthorized access, theft, or tampering can affect physical records, as well. Locked cabinets may no longer be enough. Organizations should implement secure facilities with limited access policies and clear chain of custody procedures to prevent loss or manipulation.

Trends in Offsite Record Storage Solutions

Organizations are turning to advanced offsite storage providers to address physical records related risks. Key trends include:

• Climate-Controlled Facilities and Design: Modern storage centers offer temperature and humidity regulation, fire suppression systems, and flood-resistant design to preserve document integrity and maximize longevity.
• Access and Retrieval Services: Same-day delivery, rush retrieval, and 24/7 emergency access have become standard expectations that enable organizations to request and gain access to files quickly.
• Digital Inventory Systems: Barcoding and digital portals allow organizations to view inventory, request services, and manage retention schedules without ever having to physically touch a box.
• Hybrid Storage Models – Physical + Digital: Many organizations now combine physical storage with digital access, enabling remote retrieval of scanned documents while securely storing originals offsite for compliance or preservation needs.

Modernization in Physical Records Management

Advancements in technology are reshaping how organizations manage physical records, making the process faster, smarter, and more secure.

Location tracking and mobile apps allow organizations to monitor inventory in real-time. Boxes can be tracked and retrievals managed from anywhere, giving teams greater control over their records.

AI has also transformed indexing. Instead of relying on manual categorization, AI-assisted tools automatically tag, classify, and make records searchable. This is particularly valuable in hybrid storage models where physical and digital records coexist and need to be seamlessly connected.

Finally, certified shredding and destruction services provide a secure way to dispose of records and ensure compliance. These services offer auditable documentation, giving organizations confidence that sensitive information has been properly destroyed.

Technological innovations not only help unite physical and digital records systems–they also elevate records management into an integrated and automation-driven process.

Strategic Planning

When comparing offsite storage against onsite storage or digitization, a thorough cost analysis is a must. Some typical costs to consider are:

• Pickup and transportation fees for moving boxes to the facility;
• Monthly storage charges that may be calculated per box or cubic foot;
• Retrieval and delivery fees – increased costs for rush retrievals; and
• Destruction costs.

Offsite storage can deliver long-term savings and compliance benefits, but budgeting can be complicated by fluctuations with usage and unexpected expenses. Storage fees accumulate over time, making small monthly costs add up significantly. Pricing structures between providers can also vary widely, making comparisons tricky. Organizations also need to build flexible budgets to account for unpredictable retrieval and compliance costs.

Conclusion

With enhanced security measures, integrated digital tools, and modern offsite storage options, physical documents remain a vital part of a resilient information program. By embracing technological advancements while honoring regulatory requirements and preservation needs, organizations can build a balanced, future-ready record program that safeguards both physical and digital assets.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post Hard Copy Resilience and Offsite Record Storage Trends: Why Physical Records Still Matter appeared first on Zasio.

Information Management Cyber Attacks on the Rise and Legislative Responses

Cyber-attacks have grown increasingly frequent and severe in recent years. The landscape of modern business includes rising numbers of employees working remotely and ever more reliance on e-commerce. These facts introduce more opportunities for cyber-attacks. In addition, perpetrators of these attacks have an increasing number of sophisticated tools at their disposal including AI-assisted technologies. These data breaches come with numerous consequences for businesses from reputational harm to financial losses. According to a study performed by IBM, data breaches cost companies an average of $4.9 million worldwide and nearly double that figure in the United States.

In response to these threats numerous jurisdictions across the world have introduced legislation dealing with data security. In the U.S. alone, 49 states have introduced over 800 bills dealing with cybersecurity with more than 200 of these bills going on to be adopted. In particular, New York’s amendments to its regulations regarding cyber security recently came into effect.

What do New York’s Information Management Cybersecurity Regulations Require?

New York’s 23 NYCRR Part 500 applies to entities regulated by the state’s Banking, Insurance and Financial Services laws. The latest amendments became effective on November 1 and introduced robust cybersecurity measures:

• Annual risk assessments and compliance certifications
• Written cybersecurity policies
• Access privilege controls
• Mandatory multifactor authentication for external network access
• Asset inventory programs to track all information system assets
• Secure disposal of nonpublic information when no longer necessary for business operations

Potential Challenges of Compliance

These requirements ensure robust security and accurate tracking of information throughout its lifecycle, safeguarding data and retaining it for the appropriate duration. To comply with these requirements, businesses must not only adopt rigorous security measures but also have knowledge of what information the business has in its systems and where it is being stored. It also requires identifying all applications and information systems that store, transfer or process information including those of third-party vendors.

Even businesses not subject to New York’s Part 500 can adopt proactive measures to achieve best information management cybersecurity practices and avoid risk. Implementing access controls such as strong passwords and multifactor authentication is critical to preventing unauthorized access. Beyond technical solutions, ensuring that employees receive adequate phishing and cybersecurity awareness training helps strengthen an organization’s first line of defense against threats. Finally, businesses must create an incident response plan to ensure business continuity and recovery if the worst-case scenario does happen.

Final Thoughts

With cyber risks increasing in number and ranging from attempts to phish individuals to advanced ransomware attacks, cybersecurity for records and information management has become a business necessity.  However, these policies and procedures can be difficult to implement with existing information systems. Beyond adopting technical controls, businesses must have complete comprehension into what data it holds, where that data resides, and what applications process it. By adopting these measures businesses ensure compliance with regulations, reduced cyber risks, and greater consumer confidence in cybersecurity standards.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post Adapting to Rising Cyber Threats: Lessons from New York’s Latest Regulations appeared first on Zasio.

From AI-driven automation to the growing demand for defensible disposition and digital preservation, the coming year promises big shifts in how businesses manage information.

In this blog, Zasio’s experts share their predictions for 2026.

Jennifer Chadband — Senior Consultant, CRM, IGP, CIPP/E, Licensed Attorney

Records and information software will continue to build momentum towards simpler, more connected ways of working. Evolving technology and tools that automate filing and disposal will make it easier than ever to manage information, freeing teams to focus on higher‑value work. A growing sense of urgency will also accelerate a big shift already underway: viewing records not merely as compliance requirements, but as resources to organize and use to improve decision‑making.

In 2026, this familiar goal will be more vital than ever: build programs that are easy to follow, reduce wasted effort, and maximize the value of the information organizations already possess.

Will Fletcher, General Counsel, CIPP/US/E, IGP

RIM and IG professionals will intensify their focus on capturing and retaining “records of compliance” across the increasingly complex landscape of data privacy and AI regulations.

For data privacy, critical records of compliance include transfer impact assessments, data protection impact assessments, and evidence of DSAR compliance. For AI, they include AI impact assessments, AI architecture documentation, retention and deletion logs for AI inputs and outputs, and the policies and standards that comprise an organization’s responsible AI governance program.

Organizations relying on digital systems and automation must also ensure these systems can produce record outputs on demand, and preserve them for as long as necessary, whether for regulatory investigations or legal defense.

Warren Bean — VP Technology & Product Development, CRM, CISM

• AI agents will require management similar to human users to control identity and access management. This includes which agents can access specific data repositories, what actions they can perform, and how to verify their authenticity.
• Governance frameworks will expand to include human oversight of AI systems and validation of LLMs and inference outcomes.
• Archivists will have to rethink the concept of ‘provenance’—the history of records and information, including their movements and transformations–-in light of AI deepfakes.

Rick Surber, Senior Consultant, CRM, IGP, Licensed Attorney

As AI growth accelerates in 2026, phishing and other information security intrusions will become more convincing and successful. This will cause data breaches to become more common as attackers use AI to automate social engineering and scale their efforts. In response, solid information governance will matter more than ever.

Clear retention rules, continuity planning, strong information security practices, and well-defined response processes will be essential—not to prevent every incident, but to limit impact, speed recovery, and prevent disruptions from escalating into expensive, long-lasting problems.

Stephanie Martin, Vice President of Product Management & Support

Privacy, security, cost, and accuracy concerns will continue to slow adoption of new AI agents, especially for smaller organizations. Large infrastructure costs and regulatory demands without parallel profits will likely accelerate the price of AI services. However, the benefits of AI will be limited if records lack quality, consistent metadata, or proper organization, making data hygiene a prerequisite for success. Accordingly, successful records management will still depend on record quality.

Navigating the Future of Records & Information Management in 2026

Preparing for 2026 requires a strategic alignment of policy, security, and high-quality metadata. Zasio’s enterprise-grade records management software is specifically designed to handle these complexities, offering the automation and defensible disposition tools necessary to stay ahead of the curve.

Contact Zasio today to learn how our experts and technology can help you audit and optimize your RIM program for the future.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance topics. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post What’s Next for RIM and IG? Zasio Experts Share 2026 Trends & Predictions appeared first on Zasio.

Why High-Value Records Are Critical

High-value records aren’t just records, they’re the lifeblood of your organization. They underpin legal compliance, operational continuity, financial stability, and even corporate history. Losing or exposing these records can trigger regulatory penalties, reputational damage, and operational chaos.

Examples include:

• Legal: Sarbanes-Oxley filings, patent applications
• Operational: Emergency response plans, just-in-time inventory systems
• Financial: Merger due diligence, customer transaction ledgers
• Intellectual: R&D logs, trade secrets, proprietary formulas
• Historical: Corporate archives, images, and artifacts

Understanding what qualifies as “high value” is the first step toward effective protection.

The Escalating Cost of Breaches

Data breaches are no longer rare. They’re routine, and their impact is staggering:

• 2,300 breaches in 2023 affected 343 million victims
• The average cost of a mega-breach in 2024 hit $375 million

Recent examples illustrate the risk:

• Tea App Leak: 72,000 selfies, IDs, and 1.1 million private messages exposed after promises of privacy were broken.
• Clorox Cyberattack: Poor authentication practices led to halted manufacturing, weeks of manual order processing, and $380 million in damages.

The takeaway? Breaches are expensive, disruptive, and often preventable.

Categorizing Security: Frameworks That Work

Not all records require the same level of protection. Security categorization ensures resources are allocated where they matter most. The process involves:

• Evaluating value and risk
• Considering regulatory requirements
• Aligning with business priorities

Leading frameworks include:

• NIST FIPS 199: Low, Moderate, High security levels
• ISO/IEC 27001: Public, Confidential, Restricted classifications
• Sector-specific standards: PCI DSS, HIPAA, HITRUST, SOC 2

These frameworks provide consistency and objectivity, helping organizations prioritize information management and security solutions.

Decision Tree for Smarter Protection

A structured approach simplifies decision-making. Ask:

• Is the information public?
• Could disclosure cause financial or reputational harm?
• Does it contain personal or regulated data?
• Is it vital for continuity or disaster recovery?
• Does it include intellectual property or trade secrets?

Answering these questions helps determine whether basic, moderate, or high-level security is appropriate.

Six Core Security Capabilities

Building resilience requires a layered defense. Focus on these essentials:

• Access Controls: From MFA and role-based access to biometric verification and real-time monitoring.
• System Hardening: Secure configurations, intrusion detection, and zero-trust architecture.
• Data Loss Prevention (DLP): Real-time alerts and automated responses to unauthorized transfers.
• Encryption: End-to-end protection using AES-256 and RSA standards, plus secure key management.
• Electronic Vaults: Tamper-proof, encrypted storage with geographic redundancy and audit trails.
• Disaster Recovery: Tested plans, offsite backups, and clear recovery objectives (RTO/RPO).

Each capability scales from basic to advanced, depending on the sensitivity of your records.

Deploying Resources Wisely

Security budgets aren’t infinite. Align spending with risk:

• High-value records demand advanced measures like encryption, biometric access, and comprehensive DLP.
• Lower-value records can rely on basic protections without compromising efficiency.

Industry benchmarks show cybersecurity spending averages 6–13% of IT budgets, varying by sector. Strategic allocation ensures maximum protection without overspending.

Final Thoughts

Securing high-value records isn’t optional. It’s mission critical. By identifying what matters most, applying categorization frameworks, and implementing layered security capabilities, organizations can stay ahead of threats and protect their most valuable assets.

Want to learn more? Watch the full webinar or connect with our experts at Zasio Consulting. Together, we can help you build a security strategy that’s proactive, practical, and future-ready.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance consulting. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post Securing High-Value Records in the Digital Age: Insights from Our Latest Webinar appeared first on Zasio.

And we’re excited to build on that success in 2026!

Software & Support:

This year, our Versatile Software/SaaS platform delivered two major updates with another exciting release on the horizon. Dynamic dashboards now offer customizable insights, and our Advanced Records Management Module includes disposition history logs, e-signature approvals, transfer options, and user-defined fields tied to record series.

Versatile users also enjoy enhanced search tools, including an advanced query builder and saved searches for advanced licenses.

We introduced a refreshed Corporate-Wide Access interface with improved accessibility and security. The Data Import Add-On (additional purchase necessary) is now fully integrated across the Versatile platform with a streamlined interface for creating new records. Plus, the Versatile Notification Add-On (VNS) is available to all customers, offering automated alerts and reports. Customers can contact our world-class Support Team to explore how VNS can elevate their program.

Additional updates include Versatile ERMS 4.3 and the Versatile Mobile-App, both coming later this month. These enhancements form part of our modern, flexible platform and set the stage for more innovation ahead.

And don’t forget! Versatile Retention, Express, Professional, and Enterprise customers can upgrade to Versatile 2025 for free.

“The enthusiasm and positive feedback we’ve received from customers upgrading to Versatile 2025 has been energizing,” said Stephanie Martin, Zasio’s VP of Product Management & Support.

Consulting:

Zasio’s Consulting Team didn’t just keep pace with change in 2025 — we helped drive it. Our new subscription-based services saw strong adoption, giving clients direct access to embedded RIM experts for ongoing support. Organizations embraced the model for strategic guidance and practical help on demand.

We continued leading program assessments, email strategy development, and tailored implementation roadmaps to align governance frameworks with real-world workflows and compliance needs.

A renewed focus on litigation readiness and defensible disposition shaped many projects. Clients turned to Zasio to strengthen retention policies, clarify triggers, and reduce risk across legacy systems and active repositories.

Demand surged for solutions to manage electronic records. From organizing repositories to navigating platform-specific challenges, our team delivered actionable strategies to retain what matters, dispose with confidence, and build sustainable practices.

As we head into 2026, Zasio Consulting is energized by the momentum and proud to be your trusted RIM partner!

Our citations total over 173,000 and are still increasing! Zasio’s Legal Research Team has refreshed retention regulations across 101 countries and 74 sub-jurisdictions, keeping our database sharper and more reliable than ever. Our powerhouse legal research team has updated over 20,000 citations in the U.S. and beyond, adding over 7,500 new citations to our expanding database.

And the world keeps getting bigger: Benin, Burundi, Cape Verde, Fiji, Grenada, Nepal, and Vanuatu have joined our roster of researched countries. Versatile now covers 309 jurisdictions (including countries, states, provinces, territories, self-regulated organizations, and supranational unions).

One thing is clear: our database never stops evolving.

Sharing Knowledge: Zasio’s software and consulting teams led almost a dozen webinars in 2025 sharing their RIM and IG expertise. This included our ongoing Versatile Tech Talk series, which introduces customers to the exciting features available in our flagship product, Versatile 2025.

Our Virtual Coffee with Consulting series had a fantastic year! To date, our Consulting team has held 34 educational sessions. Featured topics in 2025 included RIM programs, artificial intelligence, HR + privacy records, and securing records in the digital age. We look forward to you joining us in 2026!

Our consultants and research analysts contributed numerous professional articles on Zasio’s website — ranging from building a smarter RIM program, tax and accounting records, embracing AI in RIM, and building a customized records retention schedule (that actually works).

Increasing Transparency:

Zasio achieved several security goals in 2025.

Cybercriminals never sleep, and with the advent of AI tools and bots, the threats are greater than ever. That’s why Zasio’s Information Security Team stayed vigilant, enhancing security controls in several ways, including:

• Going deeper with penetration test coverage
• Adding gamification to our incident response workshop
• Reviewing and updating security policies and controls
• Expanding business email compromise testing and training
• Broadening the scope of zero-trust implementation
• Adding more logging and anomaly detection to our SIEM system

As always, customers and prospects can see an overview of our Information Security Management System and request access to our SOC 2 report on our Information Security Trust Page. 

On the Road: Zasio exhibited at InfoNext in Savannah, Georgia, and ARMA InfoCon in Phoenix, two of the most prominent conferences in InfoGov. Our team met with industry professionals, presented several educational breakout sessions, and shared insights about Zasio’s software solutions and consulting services. We look forward to once again meeting our industry colleagues in 2026!

Volunteer Service:

Zasio team members held volunteer positions in several community and professional organizations, including the positions of director, past president (x2) of Boise Valley ARMA; Glocal Community Partners, furniture delivery for resettled refugees; Idaho Trail Association volunteer; Idaho Botanical Garden board member.

Giving Back:

Zasio believes in being more than experts in records management. We’re equally committed to giving back to our community.

In 2025, Zasio financially contributed to Idaho Foodbank, Boise Rescue Mission, Tunnels to Towers Foundation, 2nd annual Foster Care Christmas, and the Women’s & Children’s Alliance (Hope Society Member). Additionally, Zasio is thrilled to continue to sponsor two students in Nairobi, Africa as part of the AmericaShare program, which includes school fees, room and board, uniforms, meals, and school supplies.

Cheers to a great year!

The post A ‘Versatile’ Year: How Zasio Delivered Innovation, Security, and Success in 2025 appeared first on Zasio.

Understanding the Root Cause of RIM Pushback

Employee pushback often stems from three factors: limited awareness, fear of change, and concerns about added workload. Many employees don’t grasp the strategic importance of RIM, particularly in compliance, risk reduction, cost savings, and efficiency. Because RIM touches every department, employees often view it as an IT or legal responsibility rather than a shared organizational responsibility.

Changes to established workflows can also create discomfort and a sense of lost control. Employees may view RIM as an administrative burden without immediate benefit. Misconceptions grow when employees misunderstand the time and effort needed to classify, store, or dispose of records. While implementation can feel cumbersome, most RIM processes become streamlined or automated, reducing manual effort over time.

Strategies to Overcome Resistance

Overcome resistance to RIM starts with communicating its value, early stakeholder involvement, small steps, and adaptability.

• Communicate the Value: Employees support RIM when they understand its impact. Share real-world examples—such as data breaches or compliance failures—to illustrate the benefits of an effective program.
• Early Wins Build Momentum: Launch a pilot program in one department to test and refine your approach. Recognize champions who support the initiative. This encourages broader buy-in.
• Stay Flexible and Responsible: As organizational needs evolve, new requests will arise. Respond promptly to encourage collaboration.

 Metrics to Track Adherence

 Finally, organizations should track key metrics to measure success and maintain long-term compliance. Consider these indicators:

• Classification Accuracy: The percentage of records correctly classified, reflecting user understanding and reducing misfiling risks.
• Disposition Compliance: The volume of records disposed of according to retention policies.
• Audit Findings and Remediation: Track audit outcomes and resolution speed to evaluate control effectiveness and responsiveness.
• Training Coverage: Tracking the number of users trained on RIM policies and tools highlights the reach and effectiveness of educational efforts.

These metrics provide valuable insights that informs decision-making and drives continuous improvement.

Final Thoughts on Resistance to RIM

Employee resistance to RIM-driven change is natural but not unstoppable. By identifying the root causes such as limited awareness, fear of change, or perceived workload increases, organizations can apply targeted change management strategies that build trust and collaboration. Clear communication, phased rollouts through pilot programs, and celebrating early successes are essential for gaining support. Pair these efforts with adherence metrics to monitor progress and ensure alignment with organizational goals. With a deliberate, inclusive approach, resistance can be transformed into lasting buy-in—allowing your organization the full benefits of a robust RIM program.

Disclaimer: The purpose of this post is to provide general education on information governance software. The statements are informational only and do not constitute legal advice. If you have specific questions regarding the application of the law to your business activities, you should seek the advice of your legal counsel.

The post Psychology of Change: Why Employees Resist RIM—And How to Overcome It appeared first on Zasio.