Wednesday, January 4, 2012

How to Shrink Your IT Spend with SaaS in 2012


It’s the beginning of the New Year and with it comes new IT budgets. If you’re trying to get that six-figure expenditure approved for your ECM solution – or if you are seeking to better way to capture and share documents than your current  centralized system -- take a moment and think about the impact Software as a Service (SaaS) could have.

Is anybody in your organization eager to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on any IT solution in today’s economic climate? Or, if you had a similar IT solution offered in a pay-as-you-go model for a few thousand a month, which option would you seriously consider? Do you want the solution today, or are you going to wait until the economy bounces back? (I keep asking when that will be.)

The fundamental shift in how software, hardware and IT professional services are acquired, used and paid for today is in full swing, and it will likely affect the future of computing and how you purchase and use your systems.

Consider your choices. In the past, either you outright bought the technology or leased it. Now, with SaaS as a viable option, you pay as you go. The numerous emerging SaaS business solution offerings are taking the concept far beyond first-generation application functionality and deployment.

SaaS alternatives are in a prime position to service mission-critical business applications and operations for small, mid-size and large firms. Microsoft and its partners, for example, offer Exchange, CRM and SharePoint services over the Web – and the application offerings won’t stop there.

Contrary to conventional wisdom, SMBs are the most likely to make the commitment to move their business-critical operations over to a SaaS-delivered application model. Time to market and lower costs are the primary drivers behind the adoption rate.

As a result of these ongoing changes in the way software and solutions are delivered, there will be a fundamental change in the way customers desire to use the next generation of computing technologies — including ECM. You have the opportunity to gain enormous competitive advantages to mission-critical applications for far fewer dollars than ever before.

Moreover, from a time-to-market perspective, there is just no comparison between bringing up a SaaS-based application versus the traditional belabored, deadline-fraught, time-consuming and never-ending CapEx budgeting and appropriation process of a full software installation. What was measured in days or weeks instead of months, quarters or years, will now take literally a day.

Yes, you read that correctly.

Imagine a simpler path that doesn’t require procuring any hardware or software. Instead, you sign a multi-year agreement, pay a nominal setup charge; agree to a monthly recurring fee and away you go. And of course, you are out of the business of upgrades (hardware and software), patches and hot-fixes.

So, what will it be in 2012? Shrink or spend?

Thursday, December 8, 2011

Distributed Capture vs. Centralized Capture? The Cost Matters.

Distributed capture or centralized capture? Deciding on which approach to use to cost-effectively manage paper and electronic documents is based on your processes for handling documents, and the technologies used. As cloud computing (SaaS) becomes as familiar a term as the word “social,” managing and processing company documents comes down to these two opposite choices.

Centralized Capture
In a centralized process, all document capture is done at one location. All the system components — clerical staff, software applications, knowledge workers, servers, scanners, repository, etc. — are typically located at corporate headquarters (the gatekeeper).

But if your company has multiple locations around the country, then documents are typically boxed up and periodically shipped to headquarters for processing. That can lead to multiple problems:

  • Potential for lost or misplaced documents
  • Delays in document processing and slow turnaround expectations
  • Transportation/shipping costs
  • Dedicated staff to process the volume of content arriving at the central office (creating a new cost center)
  • Space, power and environmental requirements
  • Equipment, software licensing, ongoing maintenance and support costs that are significantly more expensive than alternative approaches
Surprisingly enough, the centralized approach has traditionally been the favored model of today’s large corporations. Why? “Centralized” is thought to be the obvious way to solve business problems in the IT world. Corporations like the idea of “keeping control.” The solution conforms to a gatekeeper mentality, and the solution stays close to the ivory tower.

But there’s another reason why centralized scanning has been the de facto solution: Many IT staffers at large corporations maintain a preconceived notion that they can build a better mousetrap based on the rationale that “nobody knows our business better than we do”. Hence, they often build their own proprietary document capture systems.

What business is your company in? 
Therein lies the problem. Is your company in the business of X, or is it in the business of researching and developing, maintaining, and supporting document capture systems? These days, few, if any, organizations can legitimately justify the cost of building a complete capture application from the ground up, and then adequately maintain and support it, along with the user base, over the life of the application.

How can a proprietary system remain competitive with the fast-paced ECM industry, with all of the technological changes that occur — specifically in document capture, with all of its associated, granular subcomponents?

Distributed Capture 
In the distributed model -- capture done from any location – the software can be immediately deployed to serve the needs of internal users (rather than, say, 6 or 12 months from now, if your company’s lucky).

Distributed capture and indexing software enables users to input electronic documents, scan paper documents and input indexed data (or Metadata) from any PC at any location. The content can then be accessed anytime for further processing and/or retrieval purposes. Software for distributed capture is available in the traditional, installed-on-premise method, a pre-configured network appliance, or via the SaaS model, in which companies contract the service and all users access the software using a Web browser.

So, why isn’t everyone moving to distributed capture? 
Good question.  There is s still a number of people and organizations that think in terms of "centralized" rather than "decentralized."  One needs to look no further than our Federal Government to begin to understand why monolithic environments still exist and continue to grow even though we know decentralizing control promises to offer numerous opportunities to lower costs and improve efficiency.  Chalk it up to an ongoing, needed education process that a viable alternative exists.  It is similar to why some in the business community continue to remain skeptical about the Cloud alternative.  Despite the high costs to customers, the majority of legacy ECM vendors are still locked into the old way of thinking about software delivery – conventional installation on-premise rather than SaaS.

Neither is the ECM industry immune from the “centralized is the only way” trend. For years, many vendors downplayed the idea of distributed capture, saying it wasn’t practical because the technology wasn’t ready for prime time.

So far, we have yet to see where a distributed, web-based document capture solution could not perform similar tasks to that of the legacy, thick-client production applications that ECM vendors have been selling for a decade or two. In fact some things are actually performed better in a web environment rather than a thick client.  For example client driven database look ups in a web based environment are more secure because they don't require local ODBC or other methods of database connectivity be installed on the local workstations.

The other differential? Lower cost. It’s not unheard of for mid-market or enterprise organizations to incur costs for centralized document capture software systems (from traditional vendors) that exceed six or seven figures. That kind of money simply does not need to be spent on a document capture solution.

In an era where margins are constantly under fire, a distributed capture approach is where your organization’s primary focus should be today and for the foreseeable future. Because it’s no longer a question about capability, it’s about cost.

Friday, October 7, 2011

Free your Forms from Paper - FOREVER

CAPSYS and Ricoh-EWS jointly participated in presenting Ricoh's eQuill integrated with CAPSYS CAPTURE.  There was overwhelming interest in the offering.  An elegantly designed device that eliminates the need for a pen, paper based business forms, and a clipboard, coupled with a set of rich Cloud Services, integrated with CAPSYS CAPTURE's Power of Choice Universal On-Ramp for content ingestion, its no wonder why!

Check out CAPSYS' and Ricoh's recently published a whitepaper that we handed out at the AIIM October 6 show in Chicago by clicking here.

Best,

Paul   

Thursday, October 6, 2011

Fortune 100 Company says, "WOW, what an improvement!"

That's what a Fortune 100 customer says about the A/P process improvements recently delivered to them by CAPSYS partner, Tronitech located in Indianapolis, IN.  In fact, Tronitech's CEO Bud Arkenau headlined the success story in their recent newsletter:

Featured Story

Improving the A/P process at a large Fortune 100 equipment manufacturing company using our custom SaaS model of CAPSYS CAPTURE document management application. We worked with them to develop a process that eliminates the paper handling in the A/P approval and payment process. All paper is now scanned immediately when received and is routed electronically to everyone involved. When the review and apporval process is complete, the documents are passed on to their ECM system for archiving. No more double keying of information, or "where is the document" questions. They also no longer have to worry about who has the document and when they received it. Our solution tracks and stores all that information. As one of their employees said:  "WOW what an improvement." Our workflow implementation allowed this company to increase efficiency, decrease man-hours and provided a safe and secure storage solution.

Check out the basic workfllow we used   If you have a document process that needs streamlined, please contact Tronitech at: http://www.tronitech.com/Contact.aspx

###

Congratulations Team Tronitech!  Partners, we love to hear about your mounting CAPSYS CAPTURE success stories, keep them coming! 

Best,

Paul

Friday, September 23, 2011

CAPTURE FORMS-BASED DATA AT ITS SOURCE Eliminate Paper and Automate Data Entry Steps for Any Form, Anywhere


While we might have begun over a decade or two ago to utilize newer methods of information exchange in the form of “electronic representations” of documents, and our collective intent was to consume “less paper” within the business community, 20 years later we certainly still have a long way to go in order to achieve utopia.  Even with a viable alternative technological based platform, the business reality is there are many paper documents used during the course of daily business transactions – as hard as we may otherwise try – because of economic, process or technology-based reasons that simply cannot be captured into a business workflow by any means other than a document scanning and indexing process.  

What can realistically be done to better address the seemingly growing appetite for paper consumption in business?  Is there really an effective alternative to paper?  How does a business handle the intermixing of paper, electronic, and paper replacement technologies into their daily operations?  Is there a cost effective, acceptable electronic alternative that truly will allow the actual “replacement” of physical paper documents?  What about the practical and legal issues businesses face when presented with establishing intent, the four corners rule, wet signatures, and assuring the authenticity of original documents?

Imagine this opportunity for a moment.  What if, for example at your local Doctor's office  instead of being handed a traditional clipboard, pen and a multi-paged structured form you were handed a "device" that contains all the characteristics of a structured, paper based form, and a writing instrument that has pen/pencil like qualities and was about the size of an Amazon Kindle or Apple iPad?  And, the content produced by this device is considered legally binding, eliminating the need for hard copy documents? 

About six months ago, we were privileged to be introduced to an organization called Ricoh-EWS that have developed a very interesting piece of technology coupled with a rich set of Web Services called eQuill.  We think the Ricoh's eQuill + Cloud Services offering has tremendous potential in the marketplace across many industry verticals.  

Connect this device and its rich set of services up with CAPSYS CAPTURE powered by Microsoft Windows Azure, and you have a very powerful Cloud-based means of processing structured, semi-structured and unstructured content.  

Check back soon for complete run down on Ricoh's eQuill coupled with CAPSYS CAPTURE in an upcoming co-authored whitepaper.  In the meantime, if you are interested in learning more about this offering, contact us.

Best,

Paul

Thursday, June 9, 2011

CAPSYS CAPTURE Release Module for Microsoft SharePoint 2010

CAPSYS is please to announce the release of its updated SharePoint release module supporting Microsoft SharePoint 2010.  For a product description, please visit: http://slidesha.re/jc1PWY

Tuesday, May 10, 2011

5 Reasons why SMB's aren't using Cloud?? You decide.

Recently an article was brought to my attention about why the SMB market is not embracing the Cloud.  Clearly, we here at CAPSYS are seeing quite different results not only with the SMB market, but also with Enterprise and Global 2000 clients.  Just couldn't let this one go ;-)  With that said, the original article and my response can be found here:


Regards,

Paul