Waiting in vain for the paperless office
Published: 30 Sep 2005 10:55 BST
Butler Group does not believe that paper-based documents and records are any more secure than electronic ones, in fact they are often less accessible. When paper-based documents are stored in a filing cabinet they are easy to find, although not necessarily accessible to everyone who would benefit from using them. Unless there is an electronic index, people would not necessarily know of a document's existence or where to find it. Furthermore, there are generally no duplicate copies of paper documents or records; while they may be located in the general office, they are not, in Butler Group's opinion, adequately protected from disasters.
Once the filing cabinet is full, documents are typically put into storage, such as a basement or warehouse, which makes it time-consuming to retrieve. However, they are generally better protected against disasters if stored off-site.
Physical documents that are retained need to be protected, because they are normally not duplicated. This means putting in place elaborate measures, such as humidity control, and gas-based sprinkler systems, in addition to the physical security methods to prevent the loss or theft of sensitive content — particularly pertinent to the Public Sector.
The use of a warehouse, while affording better disaster recovery provision, does not necessarily improve accessibility. If multiple documents are required for litigation or compliance it is costly and time-consuming to retrieve them, particularly if there is no documented indexing system. Many organisations end up calling in outside consultants to locate information required for compliance or litigation. Even internally required documents can be time-consuming to locate, but not many organisations would actually call in external consultants to help locate information for internal users.
It is the view of Butler Group that most organisations do not know what paper-based documents they have, particularly if their 'archives' go back ten or 20 years. We believe that these organisations should be asking themselves whether this information is actually required.
It is our opinion that organisations should consider retaining only historical, paper-based documents that have value to the to the organisation itself or the public sector as a whole, unless of course they are required for compliance purposes. However, it would be a costly task for any organisation to review a warehouse of historical records dating back many years
Some organisations in the public sector have developed a policy whereby any information in a paper-based warehouse that is retrieved following a request from an end-user is scanned and stored in the electronic system, and this version replaces the paper version, which can then be safely destroyed.
Butler Group recommends that a sensible approach for organisations that generate large volumes of paper-based documents is to consider adopting a DRM system. To be effective, this must be supported by adequate disaster recovery provision to ensure that employees do not feel the need to print paper copies of electronically stored documents and records. A single discovery process can justify the cost of such an electronic system. Only when organisations have reduced or eliminated the creation of paper documents and records can they start to tackle the vast accumulation of historical documents and records, and review, which pieces of information should be retained, and which can safely be deleted.
Previous
Did you find this article useful?
174 out of 317 people found this useful
Digg
Slashdot
Del.ici.ous
Stumble
Reddit
