On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 8:08 PM, PeterK <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> While there are plenty of possible reasons, the most likely involve a
> combination of technology and management — and, some claim, the failure of
> even organizations with enterprise content management (ECM) in place to
> adopt an e-signature strategy.
>
> The problem is not a lack of available e-signature solutions, but the
> failure of C-Suite executives, including Chief Information Officers, to
> deploy or develop IT strategies that include digital signatures because of
> security and legal concerns.
>


Imagine THAT!  C-Suite executives being concerned about inconsequential
things like "security and legal concerns"....  I mean, c'mon GUYS, buck-up,
and just DEAL with it!

If we're EVER going to "move forward" and become paperless, we NEED TO
AGREE that digital signatures are OKAY.. and hecksakes, the 'security and
legal concerns' will work themselves out, eventually...maybe.

Most of my experience with digital signatures in 'administrative' settings
has been relatively inconsequential, but there are issues when an
individual that approves a document/record digitally changes jobs and is no
longer in the same security group, or leaves an organization entirely, and
you can't access their workflows to determine if they were REALLY
authorized to approve something, or IF THEY REALLY DID approve something.

Case in point, performance appraisal documents, which many times have an
employee, an immediate supervisor, a division leader and a manager
signature... among others (?)  AND they have a 3-6 year retention
requirement.

Or, Procurement Contracts RFI/RFQ/RFP/Final), which have a contract end
plus X years retention... and have a buyer, senior buyer, engineer, (or
other technical rep) and a manager signature on them.  Again, if approved
in a workflow process and one of the people in 'the chain' falls out of the
sequence, then how do you verify/validate the signatures/approvals?

And yes.. I realize if it were a paper process, people can move, quit, etc.
as well... but you're not relying on a broken link to find out who they
were. The problem in the electronic scenario is there is no hard copy
generated that indicates who approved what when to go back to.

At least in the 'paper paradigm' a hard copy is generated, it is wet signed
as it goes through steps, then at the end of the process it can be scanned
and a PDF or other "digital image" can be created, allowing for the
destruction of the paper (providing the image is QC'ed, validated, and you
have a process for managing it throughout its retention)

Sorry Steve W, the paperless office is still a dream.."less paper intense"
may happen, but it won't be all or nothing.  And I will continue to use the
example of toilet/office... because for all scenarios, I truly don't see
the bidet becoming king/queen.

-- 
Larry
[log in to unmask]



*----Lawrence J. MedinaDanville, CARIM Professional since 1972*

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]