Is IG a new package and labeling of RIM?

Recently, the Records Management ListServ hosted a spirited discussion on the above question.  Here was my response:

Information Governance means coordinating all the records' stakeholders, focusing them on their organizations' goals.  The role requires team building across disciplines and the ability to forge potent alliances.  An Information Governor must be able to speak Legalese to the attorneys and techno-babble to IT, as well as being adept with records.  Historically, many records managers were not skilled in this, nor were they eager to try it.
The Information Governor is an ambassador or statesperson who can break down walls, silos, hegemonies, and fiefdoms.  And, of course, it requires a profound understanding of RIM and the information lifecycle.  The job is difficult --- not just conceptually, but socially -- because many attorneys want to "keep everything forever" and many technologists perceive records managers as document librarians without technical understanding.  (And truly, what percentage of records managers are comfortable managing records in databases, in clouds, or in the custody of social media/mobile app hosts?)  [I am preparing a presentation with the working title, "Records Is from Venus; Legal Is from Mars; IT Is from Jupiter.]
If an organization changes a job title from "Records Manager" to "Information Governance Manager", perhaps leadership is saying the organization needs more synergy between Records, Legal, IT, and maybe Security, Compliance, Finance, and other groups.
Your thoughts?