From Jenkinson to the Cloud: The Enduring Principles Behind ISO 15489
How generations of thinking—before and after the standard—continue to shape records management in a digital world
Before ISO 15489 gave records managers a shared international vocabulary, before digital systems needed retention tags and audit logs, before we called it “information governance,” there were already pillars upholding the profession. Some were built in British archives offices, others in American government departments. They were carved out by figures like Hilary Jenkinson and Theodore Schellenberg, whose ideas—while different—laid the groundwork for what we now call modern records management.
So when ISO 15489 was first published in 2001 (and revised in 2016), it didn’t start from scratch. It was the culmination of a long evolution—from diplomatic registers to enterprise content management platforms.
Let’s walk through the four core principles of ISO 15489 and see how they’ve taken shape over time.
1. Records as Evidence and Information
Jenkinson (UK, 1937) treated records as objective evidence, immutable by nature. For him, the record’s authority came from its creator, and the archivist’s role was custodial, not interventionist. His thinking still echoes in ISO 15489’s insistence that records must be authentic, reliable, and unaltered—records as neutral witnesses to actions.
Schellenberg, by contrast, embraced the idea that archivists must appraise records based on their informational and evidential value, especially in the context of expanding bureaucracies. This duality, records as information and as evidence, is central to ISO 15489, which treats both dimensions as vital to business, governance, and memory.
In a digital context, this means records aren't just stored data—they are proof. Whether it’s a signed contract, a submitted form, or a database entry, its evidentiary power hinges on the integrity of metadata, fixity, and context.
2. Appraisal and Requirements
Schellenberg’s greatest influence may lie here. His systematic approach to appraisal, evaluating records for retention based on use, value, and function, gave rise to modern records scheduling. His work underpins the ISO 15489 concept that organizations must identify records requirements based on business needs, legal obligations, and risk tolerance.
Jenkinson would have found this risky. He feared human interference with the record. But ISO 15489 strikes a balance: appraisal is necessary, but it must be done within a framework of transparency and accountability.
Today, digital transformation makes appraisal both harder and more essential. We generate too much to keep forever. But letting systems auto-delete without an informed policy is just digital amnesia. ISO 15489’s approach—anchored in Schellenbergian appraisal—gives us a principled way to decide what stays, what goes, and why.
3. Systems of Control
Long before SharePoint or M-Files, Jenkinson described the archival bond, the intrinsic link between records created by the same process. Though he saw these as naturally arising, today we understand that systems must intentionally preserve this bond: through classification, metadata, version control, and audit trails.
ISO 15489 defines a records system as one with structured controls to manage records over time. This is where the principles turn into infrastructure: a records classification scheme, access controls, retention rules, and metadata models. In this, both Jenkinson's archival logic and Schellenberg's functional analysis persist.
Digital transformation exposed how fragile these controls can be. A misconfigured cloud folder or a missing tag can break the chain of trust. That’s why ISO 15489’s system-based approach is now a critical tool for records managers working with complex platforms and automation.
4. Responsibilities and Accountability
Jenkinson would likely have recoiled at the idea that everyone—business users, not just archivists—should create and manage records. But ISO 15489 recognizes that in today’s world, recordkeeping is a shared responsibility.
Schellenberg, working in a sprawling federal government, already recognized that archives couldn't be the only line of defense. His pragmatic approach to responsibility—assigning records roles across the organization—has become a cornerstone of digital governance.
ISO 15489 codifies this: senior management must support records systems, IT must ensure technical integrity, and staff must understand their role in capturing and protecting records. This principle is what enables governance at scale, especially when records are created across dozens of apps, devices, and platforms.
The Long Arc Toward Digital Trust
These four principles weren’t invented in a vacuum. They evolved over nearly a century of professional practice, debate, and refinement.
Jenkinson gave us the ideal of records as untouched evidence, demanding neutrality and integrity.
Schellenberg gave us the tools to manage records strategically, balancing use and long-term value.
ISO 15489 gave us a universal language to embed these principles into policy, systems, and digital transformation initiatives.
As organizations rush to integrate AI, migrate to the cloud, and automate compliance, these principles remain our compass.
Because without a clear understanding of what a record is, why it matters, and how it should be governed, no amount of digital wizardry will produce trustworthy systems.
Records professionals are mapmakers of accountability.
From parchment to PDF, registry files to retention schedules, the terrain has changed—but the landmarks endure.