DmTalk.com

While a properly thought out document management system can certainly make an organization more efficient, the software and hardware are only a part of the solution.  Absolutely as important as the technology to a successful project are the associated processes that are constructed as well.  All the technology in the world will be of little use if the process of using it is not sound.

Take for example, an organization that has 100,000 medical records stored in dozens of file cabinets.  This organization would like to eventually scan the entire medical record for each of it’s 100,000 patients, but for the time being is only scanning new documents as they are created.  This organization then files the newly scanned documents in the existing folders, which they intend to scan at some point in the future.  Before too long, this organization has 100,000 medical records in their file cabinets, some of which have documents which are already scanned, most of which do not, and no way of easily knowing what is in their system and what is not.  This can become a huge nightmare when it comes time to sorting everything out, and trying to figure out what needs to be scanned and what has already been scanned.  What usually happens at this point is that everything is scanned again, causing duplicates in the document management system, wasting space and overly complicating the system.

Taking the time to add a little thought to the flow of information, both before and after it is scanned can determine a process which saves from the confusion of a situation such as this.  Let’s say for example, a patient visits this organization, and three new documents are generated.  This organization may opt at that time to prep and scan the entire patient record and then archive or destroy the paper record all together.  Future documents for that patient are simply scanned into the system and the paper disposed of.  This prevents any future confusion of having some scanned documents mixed in with unscanned documents, and having no way of knowing which is which.

There are a lot of situations where following a well thought out process, in addition to using a document management system, will save a lot of work and confusion down the road, and make for a better overall solution.  Be sure to extend the design of a solution entirely through the process from the document’s creation to the document’s destruction, and a better end to end solution will result.

Be sure to leave a comment if you have other examples illustrating this point!

For those who are interested in looking at a SAAS model for document management, Ricoh offers a service called Documentmall.  Hosted in a secure data center and based on the EMC Docuentum platform, Documentmall provides  a secure off-site document management platform.

Some of the features of this particular application are cabinet and folder based document structure, multiple layer document security on cabinets, groups and user levels.   Optional workflow with GUI based workflow creation tools provides the ability to set routes with various options for approval. Ricoh also provides functionality on their MFP devices to securely scan documents directly into a Documentmall account, which can be a good solution for distributed capture solutions.

Another interesting function which I personally like is the various replication features.  Ricoh provides a couple of replicator applications which all do  basically the same thing.  While running the replicator application, you can set mappings from your local file structure into your Documentmall account, and your files are replicated to Documentmall.

Ricoh currently offers a 30 day trial account which anyone can request.  If you’re interested in looking into a SAAS model for your document management needs, you might want to sign up for an evaluation account and start to look at Ricoh’s offering.  You can sign up at the following link:

http://documentmall.com/products/freetrial/

One thing to be aware of is that not all features are available on the trial account.  If you have specific questions or needs, I’m sure your local Ricoh representative would be more than happy to address them, or post your questions here.

As always, I’m interested in your comments!

There’s been a lot of consolidation in the ECM space as of late, and here’s another one announced yesterday:

CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND – January 22, 2009 – Autonomy Corporation plc (LSE: AU. or AU.L), a global leader in infrastructure software, and Interwoven, Inc. (NASDAQ: IWOV), a global leader in content management software, today announced that they have entered into a definitive agreement under which Autonomy will acquire Interwoven. The combination of the two companies will redefine how global 2000 corporations, leading law firms and government regulators will discover, analyze and manage information and interactions.

Read Press Release

The deal is reported to be worth about $775 million.  That’s not so bad!

One of the common questions I am asked in the course of talking to organizations interested in document management is that of architecture.  Where does the software reside, how is it maintained, etc.  This is a good question, and the answer depends a lot on the organization’s IT infrastructure, support staff, and how the organization wants to interact with their document management system.  There are typically three different architectures an organization can choose from, each with advantages and disadvantages.   While exploring every single advantage and disadvantage of each is beyond the scope of this entry, I’ll try to highlight some of the most important differences in the following summary of each.

Traditional Client / Server Architecture: In this arrangement, the document management software is comprised of a server component which resides on a server within the organization.  The server software usually interacts with a database server also residing on the network, though some applications will use a built in database engine.  A client application is installed on each workstation, and configured to interact with the server.  Sometimes a client application installed on an end user’s workstation is referred to as a “thick” client.

An advantage of this configuration is that often times there is more functionality available to the end user within a thick client opposed to other configurations.  Heavy duty document editing or redacting is usually easiest within a thick client, and when it comes down to page level security usually your best bet is to use a thick client.  Probably the biggest disadvantage of this configuration is the deployment and maintenance of the client software on each workstation.  Every update or hot fix needs to be applied to each workstation, and if the organization isn’t using automated deployment tools, this can become a big task.

Web Server Based Architecture: Many document management solutions provide the ability to access information through a web browser rather than an application loaded on the end user’s computer.  This architecture is often referred to as a “Thin” client.  Any workstation in an organization with a web browser, and possibly some browser plug-ins, will have the ability to log into and access the document management system.  Quite often, organizations can provide for access to the system from outside of their firewall for employees working from home or traveling, or to provide portal or collaboration functionality to individuals within and outside the organization.  Just as with the previous configuration, the server software will reside on a server within the organization, and will interact with a database of some kind also on the network.  The addition of a web server, such as Microsoft’s IIS, Apache, or a proprietary web server will be needed to serve the information to end users.

The overwhelming advantage of this configuration is the ease of maintenance.  From an IT perspective, management of the document management solution is reduced to very few applications and devices.  Rather than a visit to each workstation PC to apply a hot fix, upgrading the server application is all that is required.  A disadvantage of this configuration is a mirror of the advantage of the previous configuration.  More often than not, functionality is streamlined to work within a web browser, and the most granular levels of security get harder to manage within a thin client.

One important consideration is that many document management solutions will provide for a mixed environment of both thick and thin client users.  If there is a need for both, be sure to inquire about this with the software vendor.

Hosted / ASP / SAAS Architecture: With the ever growing speed of internet access, there is a growing demand for hosted software applications.  Document management is no different in this regard.  Similar to a thin client architecture, a hosted solution provides access to the document management solution through a web browser.  The difference between the previous two configurations is that in a hosted solution, an organization pays a third party to host and manage the server side of the solution.  Organizations providing hosted solutions have taken great pains to provide the highest level of security, end to end encryption of data, speed of access and guaranteed uptime.  For many small organizations without  an IT staff or the internal architecture to support a document management system, this can be a very nice option.  Server side software updates, patches, nightly backups, etc., are all taken care of behind the scenes providing for a relatively low maintenance solution while still providing a very robust document management system.

The main advantages of a hosted solution are as stated, the relatively low maintenance required on behalf of the organization, and the ability to access the system from wherever a user may have internet access.  The main disadvantage is the same with any thin client configuration, the functionality is streamlined to work in a browser, and the most granular of page level security is difficult to manage.  Also a disadvantage, while not always being a fault of the host, is the speed of access to the system.  If an organization or user is connected through a slow or unreliable internet connection, the quality of access speed made be an issue.  Most solution hosts will work with an organization to determine a solution to any connection issues.

While I’ve mentioned three main architectures, there is also the possibility of overlapping architectures.  One arrangement I’ve seen more and more of is an organization who has a traditional document management solution for their day to day operation, that also makes use of a hosted solution to provide an off-site backup of their information (using automated tools), and to use a hosted solution to provide a publishing portal for information needed by users outside the organization.  The bottom line is there are a lot of interesting ways an organization can address their document management needs, and usually they’ll make use of one of the above mentioned architectures.

I would be interested in hearing from you in the comments about how your organization addresses this issue.

Interesting news in the scanner market.

Eastman Kodak Co. said Tuesday it has agreed to acquire the production document scanner division of Bowe Bell + Howell for an undisclosed price.

Full Article Here

I really like Bell + Howell products, from the Sidekick units for desktop or small department scanning, to their Truper line for medium sized departments or organizations, to the Spectrum series for the high volume scanning centers.  They are extremely reliable units from my experience, and don’t give us much of a headache after they’re delivered.

You can find cheaper scanners on the market for each of the three categories I mentioned above, including Fujitsu who make some nice scanners, but in my experience the Bell + Howell products have always been my product of choice.

Kodak certainly has some nice products to add to their mix with the addition of Bell + Howell.

Here’s an interesting article posted on CNN this morning talking about Barack Obama’s plan to modernize and standardize health care records in the next few years:

President-elect Barack Obama, as part of the effort to revive the economy, has proposed a massive effort to modernize health care by making all health records standardized and electronic.

Here’s the audacious plan: Computerize all health records within five years. The quality of health care for all Americans gets a big boost, and costs decline.

Sounds good. But it won’t be easy.

Read Full Article – Click Here

This is a concept I’m pretty close to as I work with it in some capacity most days of the week. Many of the clients I do consulting for are struggling with years worth of paper medical records which are more than a burden to maintain. The advent of the digital age and the ubiquity of boxes that create or copy paper has exploded the volume of information currently kept in paper form.

The business model up to this point has been to put paper in boxes and store these boxes in an off-site location. Clients usually pay a pick up fee, a monthly storage fee, and a retrieval fee when they need to find a record. Usually the record is in the box they think it is, but sometimes it’s not, which leads to more fees.

This is neither time or cost effective, but moving to an electronic medical record system is not a trivial task either. People are inherently comfortable with paper. It can be seen and felt. It’s tangible and easy to access (provided it’s not in a box stored off-site). There is also a certain apprehension about using computers, especially among older computer users.

Implementing an electronic medical records system is an involved process, but is no more or less difficult than implementing a good solution in any other industry. Some of the things that need to be accounted for in any good electronic medical record solution are patient privacy and security (HIPAA addresses some of these concerns), the exchange of patient information between different care providers (different methodologies exist to address this, HL7 being a popular method), and the ease of use of the system for care providers (doctors, nurses, administrators, etc).

This technology is coming to the field of health care, and in many respects is already here. Those who aren’t currently using it, will adopt it soon, and those who are using it will likely expand their use of it. The benefit is that this technology will reduce costs while increasing the quality of care available to patients.

I’m interested to hear comments on how you’re using technology in the medical field, either directly, or by providing consulting to the medical field.

I don’t want to pile on, so I won’t mention their name, but I recently came across a news article about a popular internet based web journal which suffered a catastrophic failure which it was unable to recover from. This company had been operational for a few years and was using drive mirroring to maintain their day to day operation. Unfortunately, due to an unforeseeable issue their database became corrupt, which was replicated across their drive array, at which point everything was lost. They had no off-site backup.

Drive mirroring is a technique (often referred to as RAID) where data is replicated over a series of hard drives. Should one drive fail, the other drives will compensate until the drive is replaced where it then becomes part of the solution again. RAID is a great technology, and if you’re looking for high availability (little downtime due to hardware failure), you will likely employ a RAID solution for your data.

While having a highly available solution is what any organization should strive for, drive mirroring is not a comprehensive backup solution. Even though a RAID solution provides redundancy within the storage array, it is itself still a single point of failure. A virus or database error can quickly replicate across an entire array causing a failure. Fires, floods, theft, or any other imaginable physical damage could destroy the array causing a permanent failure.

Backing up a live database isn’t always easy, especially if you have a lot of transactions occurring in real time (customer orders, document check-in/check-out, etc). A good solution is to replicate your live database to a secondary database server which can then be locked allowing you to capture a point in time backup to the media of your choice. Take your backup off-site daily. Periodically test your backup media and procedures to ensure everything works as expected. Rest assured that you won’t suffer an irrecoverable catastrophe.

As for the internet journal mentioned previously? Their domain name is for sale and they’ve closed down. Truly a worse case scenario for them.