Australian Society of Archivists
1999 Conference

Economic Rationalism and Archives: Introduction

Sigrid McCausland

Economic rationalism as the neo-liberal economic agenda has come to be known in Australia is a phenomenon we have been living with for the best part of two decades. Our focus in this session is on the application of economic rationalist ideas to contemporary management practice in Australia and how this has affected archives in two specific contexts — business archives and university archives. We are discussing this issue because we perceive that economic rationalism is a serious threat to archives and archivists. The result is that society’s memory is rendered vulnerable and in our professional duties we are given the task of minimising this detrimental outcome. We are also searching for stories of successful resistance to take away to implement in our various institutions to render us less vulnerable to the next assault.

However, before looking at the conventional view of economic rationalism as an external threat to archives, I would like to ask you whether you have ever thought of economic rationalism as something closer to home? Here I wish to alert you to the pervasiveness of terms such as “reengineering”, “core business”, “bottom line”, “outsourcing” and “downsizing” in our daily working lives. Such expressions have their origins in the ideology of economic rationalism and I fear that some archivists have internalised them to the extent that they have forgotten that there are other ways of thinking about their work. I am not suggesting a return to an idealised past when archivists were left to their own (usually low profile) devices, but simply urging my colleagues to take care not to embrace too much of the economic rationalist agenda. There are obvious benefits for archives in strategic planning and regular performance reviews and in being efficient, but we need to be aware that we may be courting danger. Economic rationalism is not rational — experience shows that one round of cuts will rarely suffice. Archives may begin with partial user pays schemes or meeting competition policy requirements, but end up being pressured to satisfy more draconian demands to conform to the dominant agenda which puts economic value above all else.

To return to economic rationalism as an external threat to archives, I would like to pose some questions. How have we responded in individual cases? Do we need different strategies for different archival contexts or are there general guidelines we can follow to make archives less vulnerable? Are archives particularly vulnerable because it is more difficult to put a dollar value on what we do? How do we convince organisations that their records contain evidence which has broader societal importance beyond their own business needs? What do we do if organisations don’t care about their records and hence do not acknowledge the problem of memory loss? What do we do when organisations apply simplistic notions of risk management and decide that meeting recordkeeping requirements is something that can be dispensed with?

The threat posed by economic rationalism goes beyond the long-familiar problem of insufficient and often declining resources combined with increasing workloads. It is one which can see archives programs fundamentally and permanently weakened or even eliminated, never to return. I think one of our concerns here has to be that the axe can fall in unexpected places — successful archives programs in both the business and university sectors have been attacked. Accountability and compliance with legislative requirements do not always provide the protection they should against shifting organisational priorities which measure everything against the bottom line. It is not only the case that long-established archives have to find new ways to demonstrate their importance and usefulness to their masters. It is also a problem for new archives programs trying to make headway in the current environment.

What has been the impact of economic rationalism on archivists themselves? Many of us survive by trying to devise strategies to satisfy both management imperatives and our professional ideals. This means that those responsible for running archives often maintain a balancing act where we attempt to do what is best for the archives and to fit into our particular organisational cultures, while recognising that our priorities are not always identical to those of our managements. We also have that external outlook, that mind’s eye picture of how things would be done in a “proper archives”. Many of us are sustained by collegiality in times of particular stress and we use our personal and virtual networks to seek solace in the midst of our battles to keep the archives going.

Another issue facing those of us who work in smaller archives is the need to keep pace with changes in technology and in recordkeeping practice to ensure that we are in fact delivering appropriate services. Having the time to do research, think about and plan the changes you want can be very difficult, especially when your time is already thinly spread. But I do not see that it is all gloom: many of us still have the responsibility and pleasure of serving the public. The growth in the use of archives and the increasing diversity of the archives user population are hopeful signs for the future. There has been an increase in public interest in heritage and archives have received some of the benefits of the quest to find out more about the past. History has become more contentious — the “black arm band” view of history has been condemned by those who wish to use history only for good news stories. But there are many historians and other researchers out there who are not deterred and who are determined to rescue forgotten and suppressed stories of people and places.

In looking at the position of business archives today, I think that there are both positive and negative factors at work. On the positive side, there is a revival of interest in business history and in research on the history of business records in Australia. Some major companies value their archives as sources of corporate memory. On the negative side, there is little to report in terms of new in-house archives programs being established or in the expansion of the collecting activities of those collecting archives with a business specialisation.

As to university archives, the position is not particularly encouraging. In universities, archives are often understood according to old-fashioned, limited notions of institutional heritage. Then there is the overwhelming issue of declining public funding for universities and the scramble to secure funds from the private sector. The Government values research chiefly for its contribution to the economy, the corporate model is supplanting the collegiate model of governance and students are described as customers. This is not an easy time for university archives, but there is scope for establishing stronger links with our users on campus and with our local communities.

Now let us turn to our case studies, to see what lessons we can learn and what experiences we can share to help us in our efforts to strengthen archives against the various manifestations of economic rationalism we continue to encounter.