<p>Records are often approached positivistically, read as evidence of the information they contain; this applies both in an everyday context and in a&#xa0;scientific approach to records as data material. This qualitative interview study contributes to the epistemological reflection of records. Against the background of the analytical approach to records as artefacts, these are understood in terms of how they came into being. Using the example of records of appointment procedures for professorships at German universities, the study examines the question of which functions the records fulfil and how they are produced based on seminarrative expert interviews. The data material comprises 29&#xa0;interviews with individuals who are responsible for the conduct and quality assurance of professorial appointment procedures at a&#xa0;total of 11&#xa0;German universities in the roles of university management, appointment committee chairs, and appointment officers. The analysis based on the method of extraction highlights the legitimising function of files: It is directed in two directions in that the record legitimises both past and future decisions. On the one hand, the record functions retrospectively as the object of the examination of the procedure, and on the other hand, it functions prospectively as the basis for decision-making for future procedural steps. Additionally, the empirical material can be used to show the extent to which the functions of the record affect the logic of its production: They are created so that they are able to fulfil the aforementioned functions. The practices that come into play here include standardisation and formal and informal review processes. In particular, the practice of adapting and revising record elements such as minutes and reports is discussed critically, as these elements are in a&#xa0;delicate relationship to the legitimising function of the records if they create a&#xa0;discrepancy between the depiction and the actual course of the proceedings.</p>