Archivists manage information about their collections with a number of different software solutions, which may have overlapping functionalities.
Knowing what system or systems to choose for a repository can get confusing, especially when potential users are unclear about their archival needs and software feature options. Three types of systems concern archivists: collections management systems, digital asset management systems, and digital preservation systems. Clarifying system strengths and differences give perspective about what solutions archivists should pursue.
What “CMS” Do We Mean?
Collections management systems are known by their acronym “CMS.” “CMS” can also denote content management systems, which facilitate creating, organizing, editing, and publishing websites, related web properties, and digital content. Archivists are not concerned with content management systems, which are primarily used by marketing departments.
Collections Management Systems
A collections management system creates, manages, and shares information about holdings, usually at a group level. It is a collection-oriented system with specialized capabilities used to manage cultural heritage collections from acquisition to outreach. A CMS also specializes in specific collections, such as museum, library, or archival holdings. For example, an archival collections management system can track information regarding provenance, history, location, exhibition, conservation, loans, publications, and other details related to collections. Collections management systems do not typically store digital surrogates of collection items.
Digital Asset Management Systems
Alternatively, a digital asset management System (or DAMS) organizes, stores, retrieves rich media and manages digital rights and permissions. It stores digitized or born-digital items. Like a CMS, different software is developed for different fields or types of content. Because the holdings are digital objects, DAMS functions at the item level, unlike archival holdings with box, folder, or group levels of description and access.
Digital Preservation Systems
Lastly, a digital preservation system manages items on a technological level to ensure their long-term accessibility. The functionality of digital preservation systems varies; some focus on a narrow set of tasks, necessitating the use of several tools in a workflow. For example, tools can check the integrity of each file in the system, perform backups, or migrate files to more stable preservation formats.
Purchasing Considerations
Archivists should invest in systems when they have exhausted their options. For example, for some archives, collections management can be performed through spreadsheets or Access databases. They are not the ideal solution, but for small collections, they can suffice. When working outside of software systems becomes burdensome, research into a solution should begin. Similarly, repositories that need to store electronic files reliably in the interim for a later date may not necessitate expensive systems. Digital asset management or digital preservation systems are ideal for collections that have robust access or preservation needs.
Another common mistake is believing that technology alone will solve organizational issues. Unfortunately, software cannot solve people problems. Systems are most effective at solving challenges caused by the limitations of older technology. They are less helpful when the problem is caused by understaffed or underfunded programs, misaligned priorities, or a general lack of archival best practices.
If an organization lacks a basic inventory of holdings or a full-time staff member devoted to the archives, purchasing software will not solve these problems. Instead, a better investment would be to increase labor within the department and achieve a baseline, box-level inventory of holdings. Then, as information about the collection grows, software can help support workflows.
Return on Investment
Whenever a repository purchases a system, it should consider its return on investment. What is the archives getting in exchange for its outlay of time, resources, and labor to set up and maintain a system? Regarding quantitative value, an archives should consider the total cost of ownership, such as the CMS purchase, installation, and ongoing maintenance. For qualitative values, the archives should consider how it could benefit from a CMS. Benefits include collections data, such as linear feet processed; financial benefits, such as reducing hours needed to complete outdated, inefficient workflows; and usage statistics, such as increased reference requests. The return on investment, in most cases, is tied to monetary values. However, improved workflows, efficient practices, and a more professional environment are equally important, even if they are not data reliant.
Making Decisions
Archivists considering what systems they require should first think about the kinds of collections they need to describe and share, the kinds of information they want to capture about their collections, and the most needed functionalities. Only then can they decide what systems are best for them.
The blog was originally published on Lucidea's blog.
Get Started
Looking for archival advising, records management, and historical research services? Click below to speak with an expert consultant.
With shrinking resources and increasing demands, archivists cannot afford to view budgeting as an afterthought. A carefully developed budget is a strategic tool that connects an archives’ mission to its daily operations. It demonstrates accountability, supports advocacy efforts, and provides a framework for decision-making.
Archives often operate in environments defined by scarcity of space, staff, time, and funding. In these conditions, every decision carries weight. Without a plan, archives risk spreading their resources too thin, responding only to immediate crises, and missing opportunities for growth and impact. Strategic planning serves as a lifeline, providing archivists with a structured approach to prioritize, allocate resources, and communicate the value of their work to stakeholders.
Archivists have long recognized patterns of limited funding that shape their institutions, yet they have consistently responded with creativity, commitment, and innovation. Even when resources are scarce, archives continue to find ways to build and maintain essential infrastructure and strengthen public engagement. Each challenge underscores the importance of archivists’ labor and provides an opportunity to advocate for the central role archives play in their communities.
Archives safeguard treasures, including objects like the founding documents of a nation and photographs of defining cultural moments. These holdings inspire a sense of connection to the past, and at the heart of that work are archivists whose expertise brings these collections to life.
No archives is an island. Especially in resource-constrained environments, collaboration through shared infrastructure provides a lifeline. Consortia models turn scarcity into opportunity by spreading costs and expertise across multiple archives. By pooling resources, institutions achieve more than they could alone.
Well-resourced institutions have developed archival best practices, including comprehensive finding aids, climate-controlled storage, and digital preservation systems. For small or resource-constrained archives, these standards can feel out of reach. The danger is that the profession’s ideals may discourage institutions from taking action, leaving records vulnerable. The solution lies in paring down practices and procedures without abandoning principles.
Many archives exist within environments of chronic underfunding. Community archives, small historical societies, or lone arrangers may work with little more than donated materials, a handful of volunteers, and minimal budgets.
However, these institutions remain vital, safeguarding the histories of communities often absent from mainstream narratives. Scarcity shapes their reality, yet it can still allow meaningful work.
Humanity produces more digital content than at any other point in history. Every click, message, and post contributes to an expanding universe of data that represents the cultural memory of our time. At the center of this transformation stand archivists, the professionals uniquely trained to ensure that memories survive in the future. However, even as the scale of the challenge grows, their voices risk being sidelined in public conversations about digital preservation.
In recent years, the concept of “slow librarianship” has emerged as a thoughtful response to the accelerating pace and pressures placed upon library professionals. Drawing inspiration from the broader slow movement, it emphasizes care, reflection, ethics, and people-centered work over speed and efficiency.
The archival profession is characterized by dedication to public memory, cultural preservation, and service. However, beneath this noble mission lies a troubling reality: the increasing reliance on gig and contract labor.
Written documents have long occupied a privileged position in archives as the most authoritative memory source. However, this excludes vast repositories of knowledge that reside outside the written word, especially within Indigenous communities, where memory is often preserved and transmitted through oral traditions, performance, storytelling, ceremony, and embodied practices.
Archival description is often treated as a neutral or technical task: summarizing contents, assigning subject headings, and organizing metadata for retrieval. However, description is actually far from neutral. It shapes how users interpret records, which narratives are centered, and whose voices are made visible or erased.
As the archival profession reckons with the legacies of colonialism, more institutions and practitioners are turning toward Indigenous and decolonial approaches that reframe traditional archival practice. Central to this shift is recognizing cultural protocols and community-defined rules governing how knowledge is created, shared, accessed, and preserved. Cultural protocols are foundational to ethical, respectful, and reciprocal relationships between archives and Indigenous communities.
In recent decades, Indigenous communities and archivists have challenged the dominant frameworks that have long shaped archival practice. Traditionally, Western archival models have prioritized state authority, institutional control, and the presumption of neutrality. These models often fail to reflect Indigenous worldviews, community needs, or the rights of Indigenous peoples over their records and heritage.
As archival practice shifts to meet the challenges of the digital age, the ethical use of born-digital materials has become one of the most pressing concerns for archivists. These materials—emails, websites, text messages, digital photographs, spreadsheets, social media posts, and more—are created and stored digitally from their inception.
The fundamental principles of archival preservation focus on the agents of deterioration, preventive conservation, and essential preservation strategies applied in archival settings.
The monetary appraisal of archives and manuscripts is a critical yet underexplored intersection of library science and financial valuation. This article addresses the persistent knowledge gap between archival assessment and fiscal valuation and provides an overview of the monetary appraisal process in the United States. It focuses on concluding the fair market value (FMV) of noncash charitable contributions, a process governed by Internal Revenue Service (IRS) regulations and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). By documenting practices and terminology, the article serves as a resource for archivists navigating the complexities of donor relations and institutional stewardship. It advocates for increased fiscal literacy within the archival profession, suggesting that an integrated understanding of market dynamics and stewardship costs is essential for the care and financial substantiation of collections.
Proper archival storage is one of the most critical aspects of archival preservation. In addition to housing collections in a dedicated archival storage room, using suitable storage materials and enclosures helps protect archival collections from environmental damage, physical wear, and chemical deterioration.
One of the core challenges archivists face is determining the appropriate description level for materials in their collections. From broad collection-level overviews to granular item-level details, descriptive hierarchies play a crucial role in conveying the context and structure of archival materials.
Description is a cornerstone of archival practice, providing the means for users and archivists to understand, access, and interpret materials.
Mixed-media archives, which contain physical and digital records, present unique challenges for archival arrangement. These collections require archivists to develop strategies that address the different needs of physical and digital materials while maintaining the collection’s coherence and accessibility.
Digital records have introduced new challenges to traditional archival arrangement practices. While the principles of original order and provenance remain relevant, the nature of digital materials requires archivists to adapt these principles to new formats and technologies.
Archival arrangement organizes and structures archival materials to ensure efficient management, access, and preservation.
Redaction in archival work—obscuring or removing sensitive information from records—has become a central concern in contemporary archival ethics. As archives increasingly acquire born-digital records and digitize historical collections for online access, archivists must grapple with data privacy, access, transparency, and potential harm.
Archives have traditionally focused on preserving historical records, ensuring access, and maintaining the integrity of collections. However, in the digital age, the moral responsibilities of archivists have grown more complex.
Archives have long been viewed as bastions of memory, preservation, and historical accountability. However, archivists must confront ethical questions in an era of digital surveillance, data harvesting, and global information flows.
As archival institutions evolve from custodians of information to facilitators of memory and meaning-making, emotional engagement has become a vital, though often overlooked, dimension of archival design.
Archival reading rooms have long been the centerpiece of public access to collections. They are where researchers engage with historical documents, where discovery becomes tangible, and where the institutional identity of an archives is most visibly embodied.
Archival discovery tools, such as catalogs, finding aids, search interfaces, and digital repositories, are often the first point of contact between users and collections. These tools serve as maps and compasses, guiding users through vast and often complex holdings.

Archives often find themselves competing for limited resources within larger institutions. Universities prioritize teaching and research, nonprofits focus on programs and services, and corporations channel funds toward revenue-generating initiatives.