I am excited to write about this topic with the hope of unlocking some “myths” around offices entrusted with custodianship of confidential documents and information.

 Over the years of my humble experience as a corporate governance practitioner and champion as well as the custodian of confidential information, I have come across sentiment regarding how “difficult and bureaucratic” it is to get information from such offices.

 As a custodian of such information, the duty to keep confidence is onerous and the consequences of breach may be ghastly both from the position of being an employee and member of a professional body.

 A couple of times I have had the privilege of explaining to colleagues that if I fail to demonstrate the authority and procedure on which I relied to disclose information, I could be disciplined by either the employer or the Law Association or both if I am found guilty of dereliction of duty in that regard.

 How can organizations assist the function of safe custody of information and confidence? I propose the following;

 1. Design of office of custody and confidence – the office should have security features such as being lockable and having lockable safes. Attention should also be paid to a measure of sound proofing.

 2. Traffic control – Without a doubt, a confidential area should have restricted access. There is no shame in that and it should be distinguished from being anti social or being silo oriented workers. Confidence is sometimes breached due to access or hearing ranges by unauthorized persons.

 3. Implementing practices of “need to know” and handling of information by the recipients – sometimes, confidential information that is properly disclosed to a colleague in an organization can be violated by the recipient due to lack of knowledge or understanding of how to handle it.

 4. Established procedures on requesting, disclosure and handling of confidential information – organizations are encouraged to have policies such as a confidentiality policy as well as guidelines on implementation of the policy.

 5. Empathy- It is proposed that the organization regards offices entrusted with custody of confidential instruments and information with empathy to avoid perceiving them as hard headed and rigid. There should be a deliberate effort, particularly at orientation, that all officers are appraised with the process of engagement with offices of custody and confidence.

 I am sure colleagues have other tips… Let’s share!