Reading Response One: Prom and Processing

Prom, Christopher J., "Optimum Access? Processing in College and University Archives," American Archivist 73 (Spring/Summer 2010): 146-174.

I would like to work in a college or university archives and I’ve been spending a good deal of my time on processing so far, so I chose to read Christopher Prom’s article on that topic for my first reading response.  The article is entitled "Optimum Access? Processing in College and University Archives."  Prom comments that processing affects the physical and intellectual control over collections and can therefore either encourage or discourage use, which can affect relationships with donors and users.  He then goes on to say that despite its importance it is under analyzed and that gaining a better understanding could help to design processing workflows go gain increased access and decreased cost.

Prom asks about processing techniques at institutions.  He looked at the sizes of the collection, staff, and back log and how much they were able to process using what techniques.  Prom found a lack of a strong correlation between the use of intensive processing and slower processing speeds, leading him to call for an examination of the whole range of archival activities.  

More Product Less Product, the Greene and Meissner technique greatly discussed in the field and in this article,  was meant as a means to not over process, but perhaps there are bigger problems in some institutions.  Prom points out that MPLP is most effective in institutions that are well managed.  Self-reflection of the management of an intuition is can help to make improvements.  Do processors know what is expected of them, is there a workflow set up, are there personnel issues hindering progress?  Each archivist must evaluate the situation at their own institution as archives vary, but the practices at institution that is having trouble processing should take a look at these and other factors.  Processing of collections is essential for providing access to the researchers who rely on archives.

I find Prom’s putting forth of possible solutions at the end of the article to be refreshing.  I’m not sure how practical it would be to put time frames on processing as collections are different and unknown problems always seem to arise.  However, I believe that arrangement and processing strategies are helpful to ensure that processors understand what they are doing.  I would venture to guess that uncertainty and having to go back to correct errors takes up more time then removing paperclips.  Knowing how to perform processing correctly and efficiently could greatly decrease backlogs and create better collections that can be accessed more easily.