As a bureau owner and document storage provider it’s often a challenge to come up with a reason to contact your customers: they’ve been with you forever, and the 10,000 boxes you store on their behalf aren’t going anywhere, are they?

However, the FLAWWEM (Four Letter Acronym We Won’t Ever Mention – except this once) otherwise known as GDPR means that auditable record management is now no longer an option, but an imperative….

While the trade-off between the cost of doing a good job in digitising the documents, and the perceived value of the information held has not previously stacked up, the FLAWWEM means that there is not just a weak perceived benefit – Information accessibility –  but a stronger and more tangible risk: how can your corporate customer be sure, that when asked as a Subject Access Request for their Personally Identifiable Information (PII), that all the documents have been identified from those 10,000 boxes of records?

  1. What if you could introduce a service-based replacement for Manual QA that rapidly and reliably automates the process of classification and extraction?

  2. What if job setup time was reduced to just a few days, not weeks?

  3. What if the same service was able to seamlessly handle “born digital” documents in exactly the same way as scanned documents, allowing for a customer’s unstructured digital document caches to be proven compliant and dependable for PII search.

  4. What if the service could be seamlessly incorporated into existing workflows with a minimum of coding effort.

The use of CloudHub360 allows for a 73% reduction in all manually intensive aspects of a typical scan to archive job, which turns the cost/value equation of backfile archive scanning on it’s head.

The benefits of CloudHub360 are even more apparent for day-forward scanning and scan to process operations, where the value of the information in the document is proportionally higher… in these cases, bottom line profitability can be increased by between 10-25%

Fig1 below shows a typical cost breakdown per job – manually intensive on the left, and what can be achieved through the use of CloudHub360 to minimise labour-intensive processing on the right.

 

Previous attempts to digitise historical archives foundered because the costs associated with the interactive elements of setting up and running a scanning job were prohibitive.  These steps are (broadly):

  • Document Preparation –  (including transportation, booking in, destapling/unbinding, manual separation, manual classification using barcodes/classification sheets, and batching)
  • Scanning – the process of scanning, separator sheet salvage, and image quality control
  • Manual QA – including classifying documents, checking or creating index data, and optional two step data validation. along with preparation, often the most labour-intensive step in a digitisation workflow
  • Automation – any automation steps designed to lessen human interaction, typically seen in the Manual QA steps and for automated image format/OCR steps required.  This may range from automated batch management and workflow, through to highly automated separation, classification and data extraction. Typically the trade-off here is in sophistication of the software required and associated cost per document, and time to configure the scanning job..
  • Administration – the human cost associated with customisation of the scanning job – broadly a fixed cost per job, not dependent on the size of the job.  Administrative tasks include software package configuration, formatting the output index, file format, and uploading the files to their destination.

We invite you to join us in  an interactive Webinar on Thursday 7th June, where we will show you how you can once again have interesting and profitable conversations with existing customers, and be ready to win new, repeatable and profitable business.  Please be ready to challenge us with your thoughts, previous issues, and complex project requirements…

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Image 1 – By Axisadman [CC BY-SA 3.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0) or GFDL (http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html)], from Wikimedia Commons

Leave a Reply