The use of more than one term for “records management”

Abstract

Objective: To identify the diversity of existing terms to designate records management and to show up a terminological standardization necessity, even if there is already an interference of a habitus in its use within archival field.
Methodology: The research, in terms of its objective, is descriptive. This is a bibliographic and documentary research directed to collection procedures and sources of information.
Results: The research reveals that, over the years, several forms of the term “records management” management have been used and that the terminological diversity is a reality in several countries, even when there is an internal intention of terminological standardization.
Conclusions: It is difficult to standardize the term “records management” despite the necessity. Furthermore, it cannot be said that the use of these terms is erroneous, but it is a continuous use within what refers to Archivology and that can be revised for a unique construction, providing simpler mechanisms for understanding those who seek information.