It is possible for two records groups to consist of similar types of records and yet need to be arranged differently. One may contain clearly labeled files arranged in the way they have been organized for decades. Another may contain a jumble of loose records resulting from a hurried relocation. While original order applies in both situations, preserving original order does not necessarily mean that each item should be left exactly where it was found.
Original order refers to an arrangement created or used by the creators or recordkeeping system that is responsible for the records. It can be chronological, alphabetical, numerical, or based on record functions (e.g., correspondence, financial documents, minutes, or projects) used by the creator. When the creator’s arrangement is intelligible to the user it may reflect how the records were actually used to reflect how the creator carried out their work and, how the records related to each other. Subject arrangements can provide an orderly appearance to a records group, but replacing original order can mean that we lose this context.
Look for evidence of the recordkeeping system when determining whether the creator used original order. Items in folders that have labels, a sequence of reference codes or other consistent notation, date information, dividers, indexes and/or the names of electronic files and/or folders are all evidence the items may be organized by their creator in a meaningful way. A series of folders, all with a similar label (e.g., name of the project) arranged by years of operation is likely original order. A series of electronic files with the same structure, where one electronic file (parent folder) contains another electronic file (child file) can also be evidence of original order. Record these patterns when conducting a review of a collection, and when possible, photograph or describe the arrangement of the records as found.
Original order may not always be meaningful when the original sequence of the records is accidental, partial, or too fragmented to determine. This is most likely when records are no longer in folders, records have been transferred from boxes to other boxes, and/or electronic files have been moved to the same location without the original folder structure they had previously. Records arranged in a pile of files and/or folders of various sizes do not necessarily mean the creator organized these in this way. Preserving this arrangement of the records because that is the way they arrived to the archives does not necessarily preserve their archival value.
To practice this, review a small group of records that have been created as a facsimile of the original records and develop two versions of the arrangement. Version one should contain all the folders created by the recordkeeping system and keep the items in the same order. Version two would group the items in to one or two arrangements by creator function/record function or by record relationship. For each arrangement note what makes it easy to identify and what may be lost by using this arrangement. The focus should not be on identifying which version would be neater than the others, but to review what would make each version identifiable and meaningful.
Sometimes the best choice is to partially preserve the original order. This may involve leaving a few folders (each containing the creator’s original organization) intact, but then creating a new series for all the remaining material. Or maybe keep the folder hierarchy of the electronic records, but include additional identification, such as more explicit titles, or group the electronic records according to record function or creator function in a new higher level folder. Make decisions to change the arrangement in a file (i.e., decision log). This log can indicate what you chose to keep, what you chose to change or replace, and why this decision was made.
It is unnecessary to find a pattern or meaning that does not exist within a group of records, and equally unnecessary to dismantle a meaningful arrangement because it is one you would not have designed. Meaningful original order may help users understand the function of the records and/or how the records can be retrieved. If the original order does not, changing this arrangement is an option, but the evidence and reasoning behind changing this order should be documented.