Análisis de contenido

Evidential value

This value is applied in a variety of uses ranging from organisations creating records and using them for their work to researchers or secondary users accessing the

evidence for formulating and supporting their arguments. The Western world has a long tradition of keeping records to establish and safeguard rights. Ancient records such as charters and documents showing ownership have long been kept. Self-direction is the social value that supports this practice.

After Western bureaucratic and legal systems were adopted, the sense of records in the West came into the society, and uses built around this sense of recordkeeping emerged. Modern recordkeeping is still relatively new in Thai society, so people, according to my survey of potential user groups in Thailand, tend to relate it to the bureaucratic system. It is very seldom seen to have any connection to personal recordkeeping. However, it is worth mentioning that though both traditional and modern practices are derived from the self-direction value, the idea of protecting one’s rights has been understood in different ways.

For this thesis, the value of records or archives at this level is used by records creators or people within an organisation and also secondary users. This idea of recordkeeping is important in Western practice and has increased in importance in the information age. This may be because modern recordkeeping and its manuals have been created in environments where the preferred communication method is writing. The evidence left from activities can be used to support an organisation’s business. This practice reinforces achievement, security and self-direction values in organisations. This nature of Western institutions has also been prevalent in bureaucratic systems. Thus, written, paper records became important in different processes, from general business activities to legal processes.

There was also recordkeeping in this sense in traditional Thai recordkeeping. Values reflected in Thai traditional recordkeeping practice are also related to evidence but have supported rights in different ways. Ancient kalapana inscriptions exemplify how records were used to support individual rights – but more focused on religious

practice. Kalapana inscriptions (on stone or other materials) recorded the donations made by individuals to temples. Unlike in the West, these records were used for evidence to proclaim one’s merit and virtue. In other words, such a record helped to confirm that a person deserved the status they held or the rankings they wished to gain. Here the values present can be categorised into self-direction and achievement.

In later periods, notably Ayutthaya (1351–1767), this type of record was secondary and not emphasised in the traditional Thai bureaucratic system. Evidence of this practice found in ancient times is bai bok, paper with messages noted on it, and bai chum, textile or fabric with messages on it. These records were kept on bamboo (Chaijindasut “Records Retention” 68). The practice represented a secondary purpose of recordkeeping, and the values required in organisations as described above were secondary values in the working style of ancient times. It is hard to know what the Thai bureaucratic system would be like if it were not influenced by the West. Though it makes sense for a culture to adjust itself when it becomes more open to other cultures, the kind of unnatural and forced growth of the modern recordkeeping system in Thailand has not allowed enough time for the culture to experiment and insert its own values or to develop its own modernised system.

A significant change in Thai recordkeeping came about with changes in the

bureaucratic system due to reformation during King Rama V’s reign. William J. Siffin analysed conflicts between Thai values and ones attached with the Western

bureaucratic system. He contends that although the bureaucratic reforms changed the whole working system, the changes in official working procedure were unable to

“strike change into the heart of the system’s values” (Siffin 161). The modern

bureaucratic system is incompatible with existing values for different reasons. Instead, some customary Thai values play a role in the new system.

Power again shows its significance in the new bureaucratic system. It came to be that the system was “organised and operated to give meaning and support to status” (Siffin 162). Another value emphasising relationships is reliance on persons, or personalism.

The concern about relationships became more important than official rules and

regulations. Lastly, the bureaucratic system became a source of security consisting of not only a professional way of working but also a way of life and personal identity.

Additionally, Siffin emphasises that respect for rule of law is “no central value of the system” (Siffin 162).

Recordkeeping is a practice attached to Western systems. It can be seen as rules or regulations designed to support the operation of the system. However, if this practice is not enforced by executives or high-ranking people, the system tends to be

unsuccessful. That is the reason why only some ministries have maintained systematic records management while others neglect this work. Recordkeeping is more needed in the work of some ministries, such as the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which is in contact with foreign countries. Those dealing with financial records are other examples. This also explains why modern recordkeeping declined after the Western influence abated – the evidential value of archives is not widely relied upon by the Thai bureaucracy in reality. The system relies on executives’ decisions and

relationships among different parties. Values emphasising rules and egalitarianism (instead of person and relationship) has been regarded as unimportant in the Thai context, and this bias has been reflected in recordkeeping.

Evidence that recordkeeping is not considered important in Thai bureaucracy is that the criteria for the assessment for ministries do not cover recordkeeping. Ministries

having good records management are those who themselves see the work’s importance and are willing to invest their money in it; these cases are rare.

Another point raised by many people I talked to informally – and my own point of view – is that the lack of emphasis on the rule of law and checks and balances in the country is supported by the patronage system. The values of hierarchy and

personalism encourage corruption, and good recordkeeping is an obstacle to that; this is another reason it is not desirable in Thai bureaucracy.

After more than a hundred years of adoption of Western bureaucratic models, it seems that Thai bureaucracy has been realigned but the values in it have not. That is, the modern bureaucratic system has operated with Thai values which value hierarchy and relationship over the systems and rules themselves. Thus, the system has not been able to function in accordance with Western standards but has depended on unwritten local practice instead. Today, it can no longer be resistant to the organisational system of working. An important thing is to be aware of cultural difference. A fix is needed for the mismatch between the values and the system, which is responsible for degrading the efficiency of the system. Two points need to be fixed, and

recordkeeping can offer a viable means to address the flaws in Thai organisational culture.

Firstly, recordkeeping needs to be an efficient tool in documentation. Good governance in the Thai bureaucratic system needs to be improved as it has been a critical shortcoming in many different Thai government administrations, and it has led to failure. Recordkeeping can play an important role in maintaining proper checks and balances. This can be achieved if the government creates transparent mechanisms of documentation and recordkeeping and enables the public and media to examine these records. One recurring problem of Thai democracy is that the military has intervened in elected governments throughout Thai political history (since the end of absolute monarchy in 1932), often purportedly to combat corruption. Trustworthy

recordkeeping and open government will help to strengthen democracy in Thailand – both by reducing corruption and by lessening or removing the potential for this justification of military coups, which historically have excused themselves as necessary to combat corruption.

Secondly, the culture of Western bureaucracy focuses on the system rather than people, while Thai organisational culture values persons and relationships. The work flow thus does not value records management. The problem can be solved if culture can be separated from professional activities. While this is impossible in reality, practical steps can be taken to move in this direction; the changes suggested to

archives and recordkeeping and attitudes to them are one important dimension of this.

Informational value

Values that might be shared in the use of archives for research purposes can be achievement (if the research is a professional nature), stimulation (many

interviewees reported excitement while using archives), universalism or power.

Certain characteristics of archival use can go against tradition: archival use requires creativity and critical thinking from researchers. The information one gets from archives can be unique. When a person wants to find information and chosen to look into archives, he or she does not merely have a passive role in obtaining information from the archives. Along with archivists who have worked to select, describe, and make sense of archives and provide them to users, users need to use their knowledge and capacity to read and understand archives. Reading primary sources is not an easy task. Users have to search, read and interpret content in the documents (Shepherd).

The result is the finding of new knowledge or information that can fill a knowledge gap.

This pattern of archives use for historical research reflects values connected to intellect. It corresponds with Western epistemology in using logic to acquire new knowledge. In contrast, the Thai epistemic goal is to acquire knowledge from older generations – not necessarily to create any new knowledge (Hongladarom 84).

The methodology for acquiring knowledge is based on the seniority system, which favours obtaining knowledge from members of older generations who know more than oneself. This value is very significant in shaping learning culture. It leads to a lack of enthusiasm in doing research or arriving at new knowledge, which is a common use of archives.

The use of other kinds of information also holds similar kinds of values: curiosity and intellectual appetite. The difference is that access to information is not limited to academic knowledge or information for research purposes. Seeking information has been made easier by technology. This phenomenon also happens in Thailand, but it was commented widely that news and rumours are sometimes believed too easily (Pongsripian; Towinus). This weakness of the society can be traced to the culture that teaches people to believe rather than to think. So going beyond information in

archives, a new way of obtaining information in general is now needed in the Thai value system. Archives can be one of the tools that help to increase this value in the search of knowledge.