As I was traveling back from the symposium, I could not help but think about all the great case studies I heard.  I was grateful that Xerox Canada asked Sitrof to speak at the event. We heard some great stories about how a whole host of different companies are leveraging the functionality of Xerox DocuShare.

Kellie Barron, of  Kawartha Pine Ridge School Division, spoke about their five-year strategic model for document and records management. She shared their road map to document success and how their partnerships with Xerox has resulted in a unique licensing structure and a staged approach to DocuShare adoption.  She also shared how Sitrof helped them migrate from EMC Documentum to Xerox DocuShare and the great success of that project.

We also heard from Mike P. Gagel and Maggie Li, of the BC School Trustees Association. They spoke about the evolution of BCSTA DocuShare and how they earned user acceptance through targeted training.  One of the key tools they were using for training is called Camtasia Studio.  They demonstrated its features and how they used it to record and deliver Xerox DocuShare training.  I did further research on the tool and determined it is an inexpensive and easy to use screen capture tool that allow you to easily create robust video demos.  I thought this was a great find.

Another interesting presentation came from Judy Cameron, of Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE), one of the largest unions in Canada.  CUPE is using DocuShare to manage its electronic documents, creating a virtual research library and managing its records, archives and e-mail through Xerox DocuShare. How  interesting that they are using traditional library bibliographic control to manage the thousands of publications and records produced by CUPE yearly.  Because of this indexing, they can quickly find needed documents--making the deployment a success.

After lunch we heard from Mark Bamford of Edmonton Northlands.  Northlands is in the business of producing major events to venues all over Canada. He spoke about why document management is so important and how it allows Northlands to manage its business better. I enjoyed learning more about their relatively large implementation and how they approached eating the elephant--implementing a large project--one bite at a time.  Much like the others, they chose to move forward with precaution, good analysis and a phased approach.  This has created a great experience for all users of the system and strong ROI for the business.

Once Mark was done, it was my turn to present.  I spoke about one of our customers, Copernicus Group IRB, and their case study defining how they achieved a 95% paperless office while remaining 100% Compliant. I discussed their back-file scanning project of 5 million pages of legacy documents, the elimination of printing incoming electronic documents and their automated all paper processes and workflows including electronic routing and digital signature approval with Xerox DocuShare and the Sitrof Compliance Module.

Click here to see the slides:  Sitrof-Copernicus-Case-Study

One element of the symposium that really rang true had to do with phased deployments.  Every case study detailed how they deployed the solution one phase at the time.  This is key to their success.  The best way to move forward with any document management deployment is with proper planning.  It is very important to make sure you allow enough time for strong requirements and design. Furthermore during the process, involving as many users of the system in the beginning ensures that you can achieve total buy-in for the solution.  Over the hundreds of implementations I have been involved in, we have found with these fundamental project principals in place,  you can always achieve success.

I am already looking forward to next year, thank you to all who contributed at the symposium!

Background

Copernicus Group IRB (CGIRB), with assistance from Sitrof and employee-driven change management, was able to transform from an entirely paper-reliant company with millions of pages of legacy documentation into a completely digital paperless organization in less than two years. As a result, the company dramatically reduced expenses and created a truly “green” work environment by nearly eliminating paper, printing, storage, shipping and other hard document handling costs.

With a three-phase implementation approach, employee-led review and oversight committees, CGIRB fostered a positive, productive atmosphere for long-term change management. CGIRB gained competitive advantage and improved service to pharmaceutical clients by becoming more efficient in review and approval process—thus enabling clients to accelerate their study start up and increase the speed in getting drugs approved and into the market.

The Challenge

In the fall of 2006, CGIRB sought a document management solution to handle incoming electronic documents so they did not have to be printed and circulated in hard copy. It approached Sitrof Technologies, a company specializing in unstructured document management with extensive experience Part 11 compliance. CGIRB wanted to install a 21 CRF Part 11 compliant document management system with workflow, version control and electronic signatures to handle incoming documents.

CGIRB is an IRB which under FDA regulations means it’s an appropriately constituted group that has been formally designated to review and monitor biomedical research involving human subjects. Running the day-to-day business at an IRB is incredibly paper intensive and requires a great deal of internal and external collaboration. But by 2006, 96% of incoming documents to CGIRB were received electronically via digital fax, portals and email—and then printed out because CGIRB did not have a FDA 21 CFR Part 11 certified process for electronic document handling.

CGIRB knew something had to change in this process and set to work with Sitrof to implement a solution to becoming paperless.

Initially, CGIRB only sought a way to handle incoming electronic documents, and nothing more. However, early in the investigation process, CGIRB realized it was entirely possible to become a completely paperless company and so established a very aggressive goal of doing so. This paperless evolution would involve a massive legacy document scanning operation, including 1.5 million legacy documents totaling 5 million pages, as well as all internal documents and all inbound paper and electronic documents.

The project also required extensive system integration with CGIRB’s internal Protocol Tracking Systems and its customer-facing portal, Connexus. It also necessitated reengineering and converting of the company’s existing paper processes and workflows—which in turn necessitated a critically important cultural/change management solution for CGIRB employees.

Objectives included:

• To install a 21 CRF Part 11 compliant document management system with workflow, version control and electronic signatures to handle incoming documents.
• To improve efficiency, reduce the need for paper (cost, storage and environmental reasons) and most of all, improve their competitive advantage.
• Overall objective was for CGIRB to become a paperless company.

The Solution

To transform CGIRB into a paperless company, Sitrof undertook a massive legacy document scanning operation, including 1.5 million legacy documents totaling 5 million pages, as well as all internal documents and all inbound paper and electronic documents. Due to the requirements of 21CFR Part 11, CGIRB must validate all regulated systems. Each of these phases included documentation and validation effort to ensure CGIRB systems remained in an appropriately validated state.

Sitrof worked with CGIRB to create an efficient and successful implementation process using a three-phase approach.

• Phase One: Using DocuShare out of the box.
• Phase Two: Scanning and uploading 5 million legacy pages to an e-file room for viewing purposes only.
• Phase Three: Adding Sitrof’s Compliance Module to DocuShare to automate the workflow and decision process for electronic records while maintaining Part 11 compliance.

Phase One:

From the very start, CGIRB improved employee adoption and buy-in immeasurably by creating subcommittees, focus groups, team meetings and best-practices teams from lines of business and IT. In mid-2008 Sitrof installed Xerox DocuShare software for use with CGIRB’s non-regulated documents, such as vacation requests, business development information, training information, PowerPoint presentations, spreadsheets, status reports, RFIs and contracts. Employees quickly became familiar with the DocuShare interface, easing them out of their comfort zone in a non-threatening, time-relaxed manner.

Subcommittees, focus groups, team meetings and best practices teams involved as many staff members as possible. Phase One also allowed CGIRB and Sitrof to fine-tune processes and customize the software before launch, again minimizing risk before full implementation.

Phase Two:

To become truly paperless, a major legacy scanning operation was necessary. CGIRB commissioned a local established outsource firm, SCDATA, Inc., to work on-site, scanning, indexing and archiving 5 million pages of legacy documents (more than 200,000 pages scanned per month). Proper check-in/check-out of these live paper documents was essential throughout the conversion process, because at any point in time, CGIRB had to be able to locate any specific document—even if it had already been pulled for scanning.

Initially, the scanned documents were available through a DocuShare e-file room for “read only” purpose. This allowed users to become familiar with the system and working with electronic records. However, because the system was not yet Part 11 compliant for decision-making, the original paper was still routed to board members. Thus by the end of phase two, and before full launch, users already had nearly a year’s worth of hands-on experience with the system.

In addition to making a certified and trustworthy duplicate through scanning, Optical Character Recognition (OCR) was applied to each page, converting it to digital text and allowing full text search of all 5 million pages of documentation. Adding OCR and full text search was very forward thinking on part of the team and resulted in further streamlining of the clinical research process. Each document was also compressed to within 5% of its original size. The OCR and compression process continues today for all newly entered hardcopy and electronic documents.

Phase Three:

Both CGIRB and Sitrof knew from the start that Xerox DocuShare alone would not meet all functional requirements for a new paperless system, including Part 11 compliance. Yet, by design, it wasn’t until a full year later—after thorough testing with non-regulated documents, working through process changes and getting buy-in—that Sitrof installed its Compliance Module to ensure 21 CFR Part 11 compliance. Until that point the mission critical documents were still being handled in paper.

DocuShare, when combined with the Sitrof Compliance Module, is a robust document management collaboration tool supporting CGIRB’s mission critical function.

The Results

CGIRB’s award-winning paperless evolution is green, efficient, cost-effective, compliant and competitive. With over 96% of documents received electronically at CGIRB, eliminating the need to print documents reduced cost and allowed for a green work environment. An ROI of 51% represents the implementation of CGIRB’s DocuShare paperless environment.

By scanning and performing OCR all the 1.5 million documents in the legacy repository can now be searched in a Google-style manner by the DocuShare software. This enables board members to quickly find the right passage in typically 200-page long protocols and investigative brochures. In addition to the time savings, the risk of missing something is virtually eliminated.

In the past, thousands of approval documents and correspondence were shipped out to sites and clients each day. Now, with updated SOPs and the technology in place to exchange electronic documents, paper is conserved, shipping costs are reduced and approval documents can be accessed instantly.

Because study documents are dynamic documents that are never fully retired, they can be in use for more than ten years. Converting all paper to digital dramatically expedited the retrieval process of these valuable documents and nearly eliminated hard storage costs. CGIRB no longer risks losing paper documents, and a single document can easily and securely be shared among numerous board members.

Yesterday I sat on a panel discussion in New York.  I sat between 2 different open source ECM vendors, Alfresco and Nuxeo in front of over 70 members of the ARMA and AIIM's New York Metro chapters.  Being the consultant on the panel,  I felt I was in a unique position to cut through some of the hype regarding the two different "infomercials" we have become accustom to in these types of settings with vendors.

As I listen to the stories go back an forth about how open source is good and closed source is bad, I cant help but wonder;  am I moving from one "locked-in" situation to another if I implement open source.   I realize the open source vendors say that if I am not happy with the direction of the software I can take the source and own it.  Lets be realistic here, there are very few, if any, companies that will take the million plus lines of source code and know what to do with it.  That being the case I think it is very important to go into your choice with your eyes wide open.

While Sitrof does work with Alfresco and has a strong working knowledge of the platform we also work very closely with many different traditional software vendors like Microsoft and EMC.  I feel if I were to walk away from this meeting with a clear point of view it would be - regardless whether you are interesting in traditional software like Microsoft SharePoint or if you want to embrace the world of open source like Alfresco and Nuxeo - you must first have a very clear understanding regarding your end user requirements.  Requirements will determine if open source or traditional software is right for you.

As part of the panel the questions were handed out ahead of time.  I wanted to spend a some time sharing my answers.

Defining Open Source ECM

What is Open Source ECM and what is it not?

• The term “open source” refers primarily to a type of outbound licensing paradigm, but also to a method of software development. To understand it you need to focus on the word “Source”. This refers to the code that developers write. In the case of Windows this source is closed and not accessible to the public to work on. In the case of “Open Source” the source code is open and available for edit by anyone who has access and ability. As this relates to Enterprise Content Management there is no difference. The “open source” code related an ECM project is rich with features and functions that help organizations work with business processes related to unstructured data. The key is the code associated is available for enhancement and modification to the general public / community member.

How did it begin?

• It’s beginnings are not new. Many people would say it is as old as the software industry. Basically back in the 70’s AT&T was under a lot of heat for being monopolistic. They developed a new operating system call UNIX (Uniplexed Information and Computing System – allegedly a pun on the work “eunuchs”). In my opinion, that was the true beginning however, I think the biggest growth came when Linux came on the scene. A new operating system that allowed for alternatives to proprietary software and could be used on the rapidly growing Intel chip.

What is the premise?

• Free redistribution
• Source code available
• Derivative works permitted
• Integrity of author’s source
• No discrimination against persons or groups
• No discrimination against fields of endeavor
• Distribution of license with derivative works
• License must not be specific to a product
• License must not restrict use of other software
• No provision of license may be predicted on any individual technology or style of interface.

Is it freeware?

• In some cases it is freeware however, licensing is much more complex than just calling it freeware. Free really refers to the freedom of use rather than to price. There are no restrictions on putting a price on the distribution of the software however; it is usually prohibited to place restrictions on exercise of a sub-license agreement. Thus in practical terms, it is impossible to charge license fees for free software. However, it is possible to charge for maintenance, customization and other services.

How is Open Source ECM licensed?

• Typically these are direct licensing models. In other words, a licensee that accepts software under the terms of the GPL and distributes it to another does not sub-license the rights in the software. Most open sources licenses are direct grants from the author to anyone that wishes to take the software under license. There are a lot of different licenses out there and you can locate most of them with a simple web search. Mozilla Public License, Apache and GNU General Public License (GPL) are a few.  Alfresco is the only software we work with under the open source ECM vendor space and it uses the Mozilla Public License v. 1.1 with an attribution clause added.

What are the component parts of Open Source, E.g.: RIM, Imaging, DAM, etc.

• Access & User Functions - Check in, Check out, Versioning, Ranching, DRM,DAM, Search, Subscriptions, Renditions, etc.
• Analysis - Categories, Document structures, metadata management, language translation, etc.
• Collaboration - Calendar, document sharing, threaded discussions, etc.
• Administration - Management, reporting, etc.
• Security - ACL, User authentication, End user management, etc.
• Records Management - Classification, Automation, Hold, File Plan management, etc.
• Storage - Hierarchical storage, Database, Native document storage, etc.
• Web Publishing - Content management, portal management, etc.
• Workflow Processing Management - Workflow management, Graphical tools, APIs, etc.

Comparing Open Source ECM to established ECM suites

What are the costs and how are costs compared?

• Established ECM suites usually charge by the user/server/both with annual maintenance tack on to cover issues, bugs, new releases. In the open source model you typically get the community editions of the software at no cost. These are only supported by the community though forums and a reasonable knowledge base depending on the following of the product. If you are looking for enterprise level support it can be purchased. In most cases they will charge a fee per user or per sever CPU. Depending on the size of the system there does come a point where established ECM can cost equal to or even less than open source.

How can we categorically analyze capabilities?

• Yes, this can be done. We typically use a spreadsheet that list of over 200 features that should exist in the perfect ECM solution. We work with our customers when they are making a decision to move forward with a solution to compare and contrast the different tools against our spreadsheet. In addition the feature comparison we also map out detailed end user requirements and weight the appropriate features. This allows us to categorically chose the appropriate solution.

What is the development effort required to implement?

• This ties back to the detailed user requirements and the delta between the chosen solutions out-of-the-box features vs. customizations required to fully meet the requirements. In some cases the effort is minimal. In other cases the effort is very costly. One of the things we do is to determine the hard ROI that can be obtained when deploying and ECM solution. This can be used to determine whether the project will be profitable or not. This is true if the project is traditional ECM or an open source ECM.

What technical level of expertise is required to implement?

• Depends on the user requirements in order to determine the level of development required. Typically on a medium sized project you need a project manager, business analyst and technical lead. In more complex projects you need multiple resources.  For the most part you do not need any special resources for either open or closed software.  They should be interchangeable.

Organizations expect 80% out of the box capabilities. Is this met?

• Again, this depends on the user requirements.  There are a lot of different features and functions available is open and closed source ECM solutions.  In order to determine if you can get 80% usage out-of-the-box you must do due diligence by mapping your requirements to the features and functions and determining the delta between the two.

What about support?

• In most cases the companies provide email, and phone support if you are paying for their maintenance plan. You also have access to the knowledge base and FAQs. There are also companies, like Sitrof that offer supplemental support for most of the major ECM products including open source products like Alfresco.

What are the negatives, the red flags? Where would OS not be applicable?

• Depends on the user requirements the level of customization needed to make the software meet your requirements.  If you have to make customizations you run the risk of costly migrations or an inability to upgrade.

Maturity and capabilities aspects of Open Source ECM products

Are current standards adhered to?

• In our experience, most main stream open source solutions follow good open standards.

What is the sweet spot of appropriateness in terms of size of application and aspect of ECM?

• I don’t think there are any limitations in size. Alfresco has numerous enterprise deployments.

Future direction

Where is development headed for these products?

• I would let Alfresco speak to this. I would say they are headed in the same direction that traditional ECM solutions are headed in.

Are there Web 2.0 (Social Networking) capabilities that will be integrated?

• I would let the open source vendors answer this question as well regarding their road map.  For the most part these capabilities are developed by the vendor and associated community.  I would hope that they are headed in this direction because there are a very rich set of features available in social networking built in to SharePoint 2010.

Is there a cultural shift phenomenon that impacts Open Source in general?

• SharePoint

Are there any trends we can look for?

• SharePoint

Ongoing development of technological standards like XML, and trends in software development have led to the adoption of open source ECM/RIM software by some big companies, educational institutions and end-users. While many have heard the phrase "open source" describing software packages or entire operating system platforms, few understand the specifics of what it is. How did the open source movement start? Where is it headed in ECM and RM? Does it really mean you no longer have to pay for your software in the traditional sense? Why is this important to the ECM/RIM community?

Learn the answers to these questions and more by participating in an engaging, thought-provoking joint AIIM/ARMA panel discussion featuring leaders in the ECM/RM open source community. Stay ahead of the game by understanding where ECM/RM open source software is headed, and how the movement can impact your organization's bottom line.

The panel will be moderated by Steve Kass the AIIM Metro President and also feature Rich McKnight of Alfresco, Cheryl McKinnon of Nuxeo ECM and Jeff Knight of Lighthouse Computer Services. Event details are below.

What: Joint AIIM/ARMA panel discussing Open Source Coding, ECM and RIM

When: Monday, May 3, 12 PM to 1:30 PM Eastern time

Where: New York Life Insurance Company, 51 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010

Agenda

11:30 am – 12:15 pm Registration-Lunch

12:15 pm

• Moderator-Panelist Intro’s 10 minutes
• Panel Discussion 30 minutes
• Q & A 30 minutes

1:25 pm Conclusion and networking.

Click Here to Register Online