We have cheated and adapted and expanded upon an email that we did on the subject of paperless offices some time ago. We start out looking at the advantages and disadvantages of going paperless in general and then talk briefly about the packages that we have seen. At the end of the day, when you see the reps for the various software houses they will do their own selling, but this is our spin from our experience at different practices who have been operating different systems over differing periods of time.
First, however, please note that we have been told that some overseas jurisdictions are more committed to paper than others and you should take legal advice in the relevant locality before you destroy papers that you might need to pursue recoveries or that a prosecuting authority may wish to use.
Advantages
The guys who sell the software can probably do a better job than us in this area, but the ones that spring to mind in a good system are:
Storage costs – depending on how you set it up and how soon you can be confident that it is working properly, there will probably have to be a period where you still keep the paper copies, but they can be saved in date/scanning order in archive boxes rather than by case, which would save on storage and time spent filing. Longer term, once you are happy that you have a fully working system with enough back-ups and checks, it should be possible to either destroy paper immediately it has been scanned, or only keep it for a short while in case a document has not been scanned properly. One way to address this might be to start keeping everything, but monitor every time that an original document has to be called back for any reason. We suspect that they will be called back very rarely and that if there are any copies called back they could have been obtained another way if you had not had that as an easy option. Once you have established that nothing is recalled after, say, 3 months, you could start a destruction programme, possibly allowing a bit of extra leeway and retaining 6 months at first, before pushing the limits. We are still waiting for a client to get to the stage where they are brave enough to have a shredder integrated into the scanner’s out-tray!
Retrieval – we think that the most overlooked area of filing is how easy it is to get at a particular document. Having electronic copies available should give you significant cost and efficiency savings, as files won’t have to be retrieved, papers found, copied, replaced in the file etc. Also, more than one person can access the document at once, which you cannot do with a paper file. If you have people working from home or in other offices, this would enable you to streamline workflows as well. It would also help us do compliance reviews remotely.
Resilience – You must have noted that some physical files and paper documents become pretty tatty by the end of a procedure. Electronic documents don’t degrade, so even if you need a paper copy of something in 5 years' time, you can just print it and it will be as fresh as the day it was scanned.
Efficiency – As you get used to the system you should see efficiency savings. For example, whereas post is currently received, date stamped, circulated, re-circulated, filed, etc. in a paperless system you can set up more efficient systems. This could, for example, mean that you scan documents on the date of receipt so that the scan date is your date stamp. The circulating can mirror your current system, but go to an electronic “inbox” once scanned, so that any re-circulating is automatic and the filing is integrated.
Control – in a good system you can set up the permissions to give you extra control over the process. One client's old system was that all post went to one of the IPs, but if he was not in, staff would grab a bit of urgent paperwork and it might never get back to him. Under his paperless package, everything is now scanned and goes direct to the administrators’ inboxes, with a copy to the IP. The IP is therefore aware of what has come in but does not get in the way of people doing work and still does not lose control over the process.
Evidence – in a good system, nothing can be destroyed. In both of the more commonly seen packages we talk about below, if you want to delete a document, you have to give a reason for doing so and even then, it goes into a “deleted items” archive and the fact that it was deleted is still recorded on the case file. This means that you can evidence every stage of the decision-making process, even when you have made an error and corrected it. Other systems may do this as well, but we have seen the two main systems in action.
Time recording – with some packages you can link documents to your time recording system, so that when a document is accessed the time is logged (but see below)
Our families would get to see more of us – the biggest long-term advantage for us (if not so much for you), is that reviews can be undertaken remotely, if the software provider co-operates. With the right software you would be able to send files to us and we can review them without darkening your doors, drinking your coffee, clogging up your meeting room, etc. We could then stagger your reviews so that we do a file or two every couple of months instead of having a more intense on-site session and you could deal with any improvements in smaller bursts. Depending on which package you go with, they may be able to produce files that we can read without specialist software on our normal Microsoft Word and Excel and Adobe for PDFs and at least one of them (Virtual Cabinet) exports the documents with a sort of "lite" version of the software, so that we can access the files directly off a memory stick. Even if you still want a physical visit, going paperless can help, as it did on one visit recently. We had been unable to complete as much as we wanted to, but we could take a copy of the relevant file with us to finish off the work at home. Once the visit work is completed, we can just delete the file and when our laptops wear out they are wiped and overwritten using security software so that any trace of the original data cannot leak.
Carbon footprint – We have not done the numbers, but it must be better to keep electronic copies than cut down rainforests to make files and burn them once you are done with the records.
Disadvantages
Most of these should not be an issue in a good system, but ask your potential providers about them and see what they say:
Change – Always tricky to manage and could be as simple as someone forgetting do something that they used to do because they no longer have a piece of paper to put on top of their in-tray, or it could lead to more significant problems in getting staff trained on the new system and ensuring that they are able to use the software effectively when it is rolled out, so that errors are made and the filing is less effective, or even unreliable, for a period of time. The best systems that we have seen mirror the practice’s existing filing system and have in-boxes where tasks can be prioritised, with monitoring and review functions available to the IP so that you can spot any bottlenecks or problems before they become important. The bottom line is that the less change is involved, the easier it is to manage the change, so make sure that your provider can provide a system that fits with your procedures, rather than you having to do everything in a new way.
Acceptability of electronic copies – You’d need to run this by a lawyer, and if you take Scottish or Northern Irish cases you should check in each jurisdiction, in case the courts that you deal with have different approaches. We don’t know of anything that has to be a paper original, but there are probably some, or you may find that there are evidential hoops you have to jump through to get a scanned copy accepted (e.g. signing some sort of certification to confirm that the document is a true reproduction of the original). If the lawyer does say that some documents have to be kept in hard copy (e.g. title deeds – we don’t know, but they might be the sort of documents that you’d have to keep), you’d have to ensure that all staff are aware which documents must be kept. Those doing the scanning will be the first line and should spot documents and file hard copies, but other members of staff need to be aware so that they can double check that relevant documents have been retained. This is where a short period of retention between scanning and destroying is a good idea. It gives you a chance to undo any errors before they become final.
Errors – I think that the worst I saw was where a lease had only been scanned single-sided, so that only the odd numbered pages were on the file. You can probably think of other situations like that and even a poor copy could cause you problems. Some of them can be solved by systems (e.g. using a duplex scanner that copies the back every time). Others will need a specific check put in place (e.g. telling administrators to check that they can read all documents within, say, three hours of receipt, so that they can highlight any re-scans that they need doing before the documents go to archive or get destroyed).
Central scanning v desktop scanning – a whole mini-subject in itself, but you need to decide whether to have everything scanned in one place, in which case you need systems to make sure that it is done promptly, even when the scanning administrator is on holiday, and that it is still filed by people who know what they are looking at. Alternatively, you could have desktop scanners for everyone, at a much higher cost, but with those who currently receive documents still getting them and being responsible for their own scanning and file allocation. At the risk of banging on too much about it, we have seen a practice run their system with central scanning that goes to the administrators’ inboxes, but then only administrators are allowed to file them in the system, so you cannot have an inexperienced scanner or well-meaning manager mess up what the administrators are used to doing.
Back-up – one for your IT guys, but given how vital the records will be we would recommend multiple back-ups with overlaps and in several locations. This will be relatively costly, but it doesn’t bear thinking about what would happen if you lost the lot. I have a term I call "Bunzl proofing". This relates to the fire at an oil depot a few years ago, where the story goes that among the items destroyed were some fairly nondescript temporary buildings....that contained the back-up servers for an external data storage company. All the companies that were using them for back-ups suddenly lost a chunk of their cover and while most of them had several alternatives and so only lost one batch, one or two companies suddenly found that they just had their live version and no back-up.
Capital outlay – any decent system will not be cheap. The chances are that someone in the organisation will want to cut costs, potentially leading to other problems. One system we saw was based on a solution used outside the insolvency profession and kept automated time records linked to when documents were accessed that was designed only for internal monitoring, so they did not have to be as accurate as you need in insolvency, where poor time records could have significant regulatory impact. People could be recorded as working on 6 jobs at once if they had 6 open documents on their desk. The time system should only pick up the active document and should log out of any screens that are minimised or behind the active document. Linked to this, you could leave the system without logging off a document, so that the next time somebody else went in to that document it would record their access as if it was the original user leaving the document. The bottom line is that if you are going to go paperless you need to look at the long term and pay for something that is going to do the job properly.
Complexity - linked to the cost point, the paperless system will seem more complex until you get used to it and nearly all the people that we have seen using a paper system for any length of time now have their staff using two screens. This enables them to keep the search page on one screen and "launch" individual documents onto the second screen (think of it like having the open file on one side of your desk and taking a piece of paper out to work on, or having a document open in front of you while you type something related to it in screen). At the relatively low extra cost of a second monitor (around £100 each), you gain a much better experience. It will still take some getting used to and you will still have those who bemoan the good old days when they had paper in their hands.
Different packages
We mention below a few different packages that we have seen. There are others and the comments that we make are based on how we saw them used, which may be unfair. A really good system could be used poorly and fail to impress us, while a patchy piece of software might look good enough to us if it is being used intelligently and the IP is getting the best out of it. We have given just the name by which we know their software and you will find them on an internet search, rather than their full branding, legal title or ultimate holding company name. Although we give a brief outline of what we have seen, they may currently offer different products, or their current version may be more highly developed, so you should look at their web sites and contact their reps for reliable up-to-date information.
Docusoft - This was the first software that really impressed us. We have not been in touch with them for a while, but this is the first software we saw that integrated with IPS.
Docuplex – As we understood it this started out as a version of Docusoft that was developed for use with the case administration software that was then known as Insolv (now Vision Blue).
Virtual Cabinet - This is our current favourite, but that is probably because they flattered us by inviting us to look around their Cambridge HQ, see the software in action and meet some of their management and support team. They understand that IPs are different from accountants and they are keen to offer something that can operate equally well in a specialist IP practice, but is based on their tried and tested general practice software, so that it will appeal both to the general practice and the business recovery side. We'd have thought that you must have heard from them, as they are actively marketing. From what we saw, it is a cracking piece of kit with some really clever tricks, not the least of which is the ability to flick through the file using pictures of each page, just as if you were flicking through a paper file. They are working on increased integration with IPS (they already had a background working with other case management systems) and the signs are that they are taking this very seriously. If it was my money, this is where I would put it at the moment and it is interesting that two clients that we have seen move away from other packages both went to VC, although at least one of those was a "whole-firm" strategic decision driven by the general practice partners.
Invu - we have seen a couple of practices that use this. The first version that we saw, around 6 or 7 years ago, was very clunky and poorly used by the practice and I suspect that we did not see it at anything like its best. It has improved over time and we are more familiar with it, making it easier to use, so I would not run screaming from the room if you opted for it.
Other than that, it tends to be niche packages adapted for a particular IP, or bespoke ones designed by nearby software providers and they tend to be a bit more "original" in their approach. Apart from the fact that you would probably not get a chance to use them anyway, most of them are only used by one IP precisely because they would only work with that IP's system.
We don’t get commissions or fees from any of the providers and we know that the performance of different providers can vary over time, but hopefully this will lead you to start thinking about the concept of a paperless office and you will talk to some of the providers to see how they could help you further.
