Posted by Mark Brousseau
For Gateway EDI, EHNAC accreditation shows the way to best practices. EHNAC Executive Director Lee Barrett explains:
As one of the fastest-growing providers of healthcare electronic data interchange, Gateway EDI processes transactions for more than 10,000 medical offices representing 50,000 providers in all 50 states. Gateway EDI also connects to more than 3,000 payers and offers services ranging from standard claims processing and status reports to more advanced capabilities such as technology for flagging rejected claims.
Founded in 1983, Gateway EDI has continuously pursued innovations, business practices and opportunities to improve its services. In 2006, just such an opportunity arose through a relationship with the Electronic Healthcare Network Accreditation Commission (EHNAC).
“Our initial interest in EHNAC was prompted by a state of Maryland requirement,” recalls Dave Cheli, chief information officer, at Gateway EDI. “But the accreditation process proved to be a real eye-opener for us.”
An industry veteran, Cheli was already familiar with EHNAC’s work, which dates to the early 1990s. Though the Gateway EDI team knew generally what to expect, they were pleasantly surprised with the advantages of achieving full accreditation in March 2006.
“It provided a great framework for bringing together a wide range of security, privacy and operational aspects,” says Cheli. “Seeing it all from EHNAC’s perspective in a comprehensive overview was an interesting experience. It shined some light on some aspects of our business where there had been missing pieces.”
Taking a closer look
Transaction auditing serves as a case in point. Gateway EDI manages more than 15 million transactions a month, and the EHNAC criteria require that electronic health networks demonstrate the ability to produce detailed audit trails for all of them.
“Most clearinghouses handle millions of transactions on a monthly basis,” says Cheli. “You might think you can account for every transaction, but EHNAC forces you to show that you can. When you start looking at reports and doing the research, you learn more about your business. For us, the process highlighted some areas where we were able to shore up our capability to reconcile every single transaction.”
In addition to these operational enhancements, EHNAC accreditation has impacted the customer service side. “As a result of our original accreditation in 2006, we added some processes that have benefitted our clients, such as closer monitoring of customer service status,” says Cheli.
In response to marketplace trends, Gateway EDI has grown its business on the strength of value-added services and strong support. And in the years since it began working with EHNAC, Gateway EDI has further built on that advantage. In May 2008, Gateway EDI was included in the “Ambulatory EDI Claims Clearinghouse” report published by KLAS, the Orem, Utah-based research firm (www.KLASresearch.com) specializing in monitoring and reporting the performance of healthcare vendors.
Gateway EDI’s results included 100 percent positive commentary regarding the vendor relationship, and perfect scores, 100 percent, for Would Recommend to a Friend or Peer, and Services Delivered within Budget/Cost. With most Gateway EDI customers “feeling well taken care of”, Gateway EDI earned an 89 overall rating score, a functional strength rating of 4.5 out of 5.0., and first-place for practice management integration. It also captured the top rating in several categories, including “Quality of Services Staff” and “Real Problem Resolution.”
Standards as best practices
As a self-governing non-profit, EHNAC maintains a comprehensive set of publicly-available standards criteria covering privacy and confidentiality; technical performance; business practices; physical, human and administrative resources; and security.
The EHNAC standards development process is fully open and transparent. Based on years of research, it’s the result of continuous input from electronic health networks, payers, hospitals, physicians, consumer groups, financial services firms, security organizations and vendors.
“Because it’s built on years of studying the industry and it’s so broad based, the EHNAC criteria have essentially become a collection of best practices,” says Cheli.
A credible process
EHNAC’s accreditation process, which is based on these established standards, begins with a candidate organization’s submission of an in-depth self-assessment. Later, an EHNAC site reviewer visits to evaluate the accreditation candidate more closely. This hands-on approach helps companies identify issues as well as opportunities.
“In 2006 and again, with our re-accreditation in 2008, the EHNAC assessor spent time understanding our processes. They’ve asked a lot of insightful questions and shared some wonderful tips with us,” says Cheli. “For example, this year we got some very valuable advice on improving our disaster recovery and business continuity measures.”
An operational catalyst
Cheli believes that EHNAC has served as a sort of catalyst, helping Gateway EDI expand privacy and security measures, make decisions about business practices and set meaningful operational objectives. “We now have a lot of people setting departmental goals and monitoring performance metrics that are built around EHNAC criteria,” he says. “Getting a set percentage of claims out in a certain time frame, for example, is now crystallized for us as a monthly goal. And we’re more meticulous about monitoring against those goals.”
“Would we have gotten there without EHNAC driving a lot of this?” Cheli asks. “Probably. But not as quickly. EHNAC is the only organization that provides a comprehensive accreditation service for clearinghouses. HIPAA-related issues are just a part of the overall criteria. They look at it from a total operational perspective.”
Truth in advertising
One also can see the results of Gateway EDI’s efforts with a quick visit to its website. Gateway EDI customers have an average overall error rate of only seven percent. Ninety-eight percent of customer service calls are answered directly by a real person. Gateway EDI solves 92 percent of customer questions on the first call.
And prospects can rest assured that these claims about claims are real. In addition to performance standards and policies and procedures, EHNAC accreditation encompasses “truth-in-advertising” criteria. So statements like these are verifiable.
What began as a requirement has become a resource for Gateway EDI — and relationship, too. “The people behind EHNAC are experienced, smart and very passionate about what they do,” says Cheli. “They’ve been extremely supportive of us, and our relationship has been wonderful.”
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
ibml Assists Habitat for Humanity
Posted by Mark Brousseau
Last weekend, about 100 ibml employees assisted in the construction of a home for a deserving family in Birmingham, AL. ibml worked in concert with Habitat for Humanity, ABC 33/40 and other Central Alabama businesses.
Led by a Habitat Construction Supervisor, ibml employees assisted with construction tasks on a home for Tiffani Whitehead and her three children: Darion (age 10), DeVaunte (7) and Tahlia (4). Both boys attend Powderly Elementary School, where they have competed in the Math Derby several times. Tahlia, who is very "girly," enjoys lip gloss and fingernail polish. Tiffani has been employed as a customer service coordinator for BBVA Compass Bank for the past five years. The family attends New Pilgrim Baptist Church in Titusville, AL.
A global company headquartered in Birmingham, ibml has approximately 125 employees in the city.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
NACHA Rule Strengthens Need for Payments Hub
Posted by Mark Brousseau
NACHA's proposed rule change for mobile payments provides a wake-up call for banks and billers unconvinced of the need for an Enterprise Payments Hub. Leilani Doyle (ldoyle@usdataworks.com) of US Dataworks (www.usdataworks.com) explains:
A proposed NACHA rule change for mobile payments is another nudge for banks and billers that have been reluctant to deal with the stark realities of the increasingly diverse payments environment.
The proposed rule change would expand the definition of Internet-Initiated Entries (WEB) to include ACH debits authorized and/or initiated via mobile/wireless networks, and require that those payments utilize the WEB Standard Entry Class (SEC) code. The rule change would cover payments made with a mobile device such as a smart phone, cell phone, and/or PDA, where the payment is transmitted via a wireless network. NACHA just concluded a request for comments on the change.
Expanding the WEB SEC code to include mobile payments is a reasonable idea.
NACHA says the rule change would clarify the entry classification for mobile payments over the ACH Network, and provide a framework for risk management and security, including authentication and authorization. While current NACHA rules don't specifically address mobile payments, many companies are either originating these payments over the ACH Network, or planning to in the future.
The NACHA proposal comes at a time when mobile payments are poised to grow. Insight Research Corporation estimates that 2.2 billion consumers will generate $124 billion in mobile financial transactions by 2014. More conservatively, Mercator Advisory Group estimates that payments from remote devices will grow from an estimated $389 million in 2009 to $8.9 billion in 2014.
A Better Solution
Regardless of how fast you believe mobile payments will grow, the NACHA rule change for mobile payments shines a bright light on a subject that is vexing many banks and billers: how to deal with yet another distinct delivery channel for payments with its own unique characteristics. Banks and billers must balance the need to mitigate the risks of each payment channel with the desire to remain flexible and avoid creating new silos, which, in turn, stifle agility and customer responsiveness.
To be sure, as mobile payments volumes rise, the channel will bring its own set of systems and process challenges, and be subject to fraud and attack -- regardless of the NACHA rule change.
That's true of all of the emerging payment channels.
The solution lies in utilizing an Enterprise Payments Hub to provide a single platform for processing all paper-based and electronic payments (including mobile), regardless of clearing channels.
An Enterprise Payments Hub provides a consolidated, end-to-end transaction processing platform that offers integration with legacy payments and receivables systems and processes. Management of all payment channels, including lockbox, mobile/wireless, Web bill payments, and over-the-counter work, is controlled through a single enterprise platform. An Enterprise Payments Hub is capable of managing the entire payments lifecycle including payments processing, check processing, retail processing, payments decisioning, and returns management. Incoming payments are cleared using Check 21 and ARC conversion for conventional remittance or lockbox processing, while other forms of bill payment and retail work is processed using the appropriate NACHA SEC code ( i.e. ARC, POP, RCK, TEL, WEB, PPD, CCD and BOC). Credit card and debit card payments are also processed through the platform for a fully integrated accounts receivable (AR) process.
An Enterprise Payments Hub is especially effective when the multiple payments channels of an organization are centralized, as standalone systems and processes can be significantly reduced. For example, an Enterprise Payments Hub can enhance workflow and data management, and facilitate common processes and administration across all payment channels. This functionality eliminates manual processes, accelerates exceptions handling, increases corporate agility, and improves float.
These capabilities also provide a platform for straight-through-processing (STP).
The Bottom Line
While the United States lags behind many industrialized countries in the adoption of mobile payments, there is no question that banks and billers need to be prepared for the channel's inevitable growth. The sooner organizations can develop a framework for mobile payments usage and risk, the better positioned they will be when the channel explodes. NACHA should be applauded for providing some level of regulatory guidance on payments that originate from mobile devices.
But the proposed NACHA rule change is only one piece of the emerging puzzle.
To optimize their payments processing and risk management, banks and billers must bring all of their payments channels -- including mobile/wireless -- together in an Enterprise Payments Hub.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
NACHA's proposed rule change for mobile payments provides a wake-up call for banks and billers unconvinced of the need for an Enterprise Payments Hub. Leilani Doyle (ldoyle@usdataworks.com) of US Dataworks (www.usdataworks.com) explains:
A proposed NACHA rule change for mobile payments is another nudge for banks and billers that have been reluctant to deal with the stark realities of the increasingly diverse payments environment.
The proposed rule change would expand the definition of Internet-Initiated Entries (WEB) to include ACH debits authorized and/or initiated via mobile/wireless networks, and require that those payments utilize the WEB Standard Entry Class (SEC) code. The rule change would cover payments made with a mobile device such as a smart phone, cell phone, and/or PDA, where the payment is transmitted via a wireless network. NACHA just concluded a request for comments on the change.
Expanding the WEB SEC code to include mobile payments is a reasonable idea.
NACHA says the rule change would clarify the entry classification for mobile payments over the ACH Network, and provide a framework for risk management and security, including authentication and authorization. While current NACHA rules don't specifically address mobile payments, many companies are either originating these payments over the ACH Network, or planning to in the future.
The NACHA proposal comes at a time when mobile payments are poised to grow. Insight Research Corporation estimates that 2.2 billion consumers will generate $124 billion in mobile financial transactions by 2014. More conservatively, Mercator Advisory Group estimates that payments from remote devices will grow from an estimated $389 million in 2009 to $8.9 billion in 2014.
A Better Solution
Regardless of how fast you believe mobile payments will grow, the NACHA rule change for mobile payments shines a bright light on a subject that is vexing many banks and billers: how to deal with yet another distinct delivery channel for payments with its own unique characteristics. Banks and billers must balance the need to mitigate the risks of each payment channel with the desire to remain flexible and avoid creating new silos, which, in turn, stifle agility and customer responsiveness.
To be sure, as mobile payments volumes rise, the channel will bring its own set of systems and process challenges, and be subject to fraud and attack -- regardless of the NACHA rule change.
That's true of all of the emerging payment channels.
The solution lies in utilizing an Enterprise Payments Hub to provide a single platform for processing all paper-based and electronic payments (including mobile), regardless of clearing channels.
An Enterprise Payments Hub provides a consolidated, end-to-end transaction processing platform that offers integration with legacy payments and receivables systems and processes. Management of all payment channels, including lockbox, mobile/wireless, Web bill payments, and over-the-counter work, is controlled through a single enterprise platform. An Enterprise Payments Hub is capable of managing the entire payments lifecycle including payments processing, check processing, retail processing, payments decisioning, and returns management. Incoming payments are cleared using Check 21 and ARC conversion for conventional remittance or lockbox processing, while other forms of bill payment and retail work is processed using the appropriate NACHA SEC code ( i.e. ARC, POP, RCK, TEL, WEB, PPD, CCD and BOC). Credit card and debit card payments are also processed through the platform for a fully integrated accounts receivable (AR) process.
An Enterprise Payments Hub is especially effective when the multiple payments channels of an organization are centralized, as standalone systems and processes can be significantly reduced. For example, an Enterprise Payments Hub can enhance workflow and data management, and facilitate common processes and administration across all payment channels. This functionality eliminates manual processes, accelerates exceptions handling, increases corporate agility, and improves float.
These capabilities also provide a platform for straight-through-processing (STP).
The Bottom Line
While the United States lags behind many industrialized countries in the adoption of mobile payments, there is no question that banks and billers need to be prepared for the channel's inevitable growth. The sooner organizations can develop a framework for mobile payments usage and risk, the better positioned they will be when the channel explodes. NACHA should be applauded for providing some level of regulatory guidance on payments that originate from mobile devices.
But the proposed NACHA rule change is only one piece of the emerging puzzle.
To optimize their payments processing and risk management, banks and billers must bring all of their payments channels -- including mobile/wireless -- together in an Enterprise Payments Hub.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
The Case for a Technology Refresh
Posted by Mark Brousseau
In spite of the economy, this might be a good time for organizations to refresh their technology infrastructure. Doug Myers (dmyers@creditron.com), Creditron's vice president of sales and business development, explains:
If your payments processing department's performance isn't up to snuff, it may be because you spend too much time and money maintaining and managing your existing systems, and not enough on investments in new technologies. Spending money now to refresh your payments infrastructure could pay big dividends long-term and better position your organization for the economic recovery.
The fact is, many organizations rely on inefficient and outdated equipment to process their payments. Many of these systems were installed in the run-up to Y2K. As evidence, 72 percent of attendees to a recent Creditron Webinar stated that their legacy remittance processing system was between eight and ten years old. This means they were installed long before Check 21, remote deposit capture, the growth of Accounts Receivable Check Conversion, or the maturation of imaging at mail extraction.
This type of outdated technology can compromise cost efficiency and business productivity.
To this point, TAWPI's 2009 Payments Benchmarking Study found that more billers reported that their unit costs have increased over the past year than those that reported declines. This rise in costs is in spite of the intense focus at most organizations to drive down costs. What's more, billers who responded to the survey reported that they have seen some decline in quality over the past year. The study reported that the chief culprit for this decline in quality is older equipment that needs updating.
Moreover, 36 percent of attendees to the Creditron Webinar said the biggest challenge with their legacy remittance system was the steep maintenance fees and high number of manual processes it requires. Another 18 percent of Webinar attendees cited poor software and hardware reliability, and lack of Check 21 capabilities as the biggest issues with their existing remittance processing system.
But this old technology may be costing operations managers even more than they realize. Dig deeper and they will likely find other ways that their antiquated technology is hampering their bottom line:
• Large footprint for outdated scanners
• Expensive scanner supplies and consumables
• Lack of redundancy for scanners
• Antiquated or inflexible software workflows
• Limited new hardware and software features
• No ability to consolidate paper and electronic payment streams
So what's an organization to do? One option is to outsource its payments processing. But this requires a leap of faith that a third-party provider can match the levels of quality and timeliness currently achieved by an organization's in-house operation. This isn't likely. And most companies realize it: despite a brutal economy, there has been a decrease this year in the number of RFPs issued by billers looking to outsource payments processing. Another option is to do nothing different. While avoiding capital investment, this option does nothing to address an operation's rising unit costs or the potential of unsupported equipment. A third option is to try upgrading the operation's existing infrastructure. This option is likely to disappoint organizations across the board: it requires capital investment, but only provides limited benefits in terms of functionality, efficiency and cost control.
Clearly, the best option is a refresh of the organization's payments processing infrastructure. In addition to significant savings on hardware maintenance and supplies, a compelling business case for a technology refresh can built on anticipated benefits from automated mail extraction, image inquiry, hot file capabilities, courtesy and legal amount recognition, Check 21 as a Service, and cashiering.
With a technology refresh, companies can slash processing costs, improve access to working capital, provide a foundation for future business needs, and eliminate the risk of equipment obsolescence.
Here's a real-world example: a utility that processes an average of 3,700 payments a day would save more than $900,000 over five years by refreshing its legacy payments infrastructure with an end-to-end solution that includes cashiering, automated mail extraction, an image-based remittance solution, and Check 21. What's more, the utility would significantly improve its access to working capital.
With an eye-popping business case like this, it's little wonder that 6 percent of attendees to the recent Creditron Webinar stated that they plan to replace their legacy remittance processing system in the next six months, while another 6 percent of attendees said they plan to do so in the next 12 months.
So, don't let low payments processing performance be a problem of your own making.
By choosing to invest in new technology in the short-term, you can keep your operations costs low, address current and future business needs, and be in a better position to outperform your peers.
In spite of the economy, this might be a good time for organizations to refresh their technology infrastructure. Doug Myers (dmyers@creditron.com), Creditron's vice president of sales and business development, explains:
If your payments processing department's performance isn't up to snuff, it may be because you spend too much time and money maintaining and managing your existing systems, and not enough on investments in new technologies. Spending money now to refresh your payments infrastructure could pay big dividends long-term and better position your organization for the economic recovery.
The fact is, many organizations rely on inefficient and outdated equipment to process their payments. Many of these systems were installed in the run-up to Y2K. As evidence, 72 percent of attendees to a recent Creditron Webinar stated that their legacy remittance processing system was between eight and ten years old. This means they were installed long before Check 21, remote deposit capture, the growth of Accounts Receivable Check Conversion, or the maturation of imaging at mail extraction.
This type of outdated technology can compromise cost efficiency and business productivity.
To this point, TAWPI's 2009 Payments Benchmarking Study found that more billers reported that their unit costs have increased over the past year than those that reported declines. This rise in costs is in spite of the intense focus at most organizations to drive down costs. What's more, billers who responded to the survey reported that they have seen some decline in quality over the past year. The study reported that the chief culprit for this decline in quality is older equipment that needs updating.
Moreover, 36 percent of attendees to the Creditron Webinar said the biggest challenge with their legacy remittance system was the steep maintenance fees and high number of manual processes it requires. Another 18 percent of Webinar attendees cited poor software and hardware reliability, and lack of Check 21 capabilities as the biggest issues with their existing remittance processing system.
But this old technology may be costing operations managers even more than they realize. Dig deeper and they will likely find other ways that their antiquated technology is hampering their bottom line:
• Large footprint for outdated scanners
• Expensive scanner supplies and consumables
• Lack of redundancy for scanners
• Antiquated or inflexible software workflows
• Limited new hardware and software features
• No ability to consolidate paper and electronic payment streams
So what's an organization to do? One option is to outsource its payments processing. But this requires a leap of faith that a third-party provider can match the levels of quality and timeliness currently achieved by an organization's in-house operation. This isn't likely. And most companies realize it: despite a brutal economy, there has been a decrease this year in the number of RFPs issued by billers looking to outsource payments processing. Another option is to do nothing different. While avoiding capital investment, this option does nothing to address an operation's rising unit costs or the potential of unsupported equipment. A third option is to try upgrading the operation's existing infrastructure. This option is likely to disappoint organizations across the board: it requires capital investment, but only provides limited benefits in terms of functionality, efficiency and cost control.
Clearly, the best option is a refresh of the organization's payments processing infrastructure. In addition to significant savings on hardware maintenance and supplies, a compelling business case for a technology refresh can built on anticipated benefits from automated mail extraction, image inquiry, hot file capabilities, courtesy and legal amount recognition, Check 21 as a Service, and cashiering.
With a technology refresh, companies can slash processing costs, improve access to working capital, provide a foundation for future business needs, and eliminate the risk of equipment obsolescence.
Here's a real-world example: a utility that processes an average of 3,700 payments a day would save more than $900,000 over five years by refreshing its legacy payments infrastructure with an end-to-end solution that includes cashiering, automated mail extraction, an image-based remittance solution, and Check 21. What's more, the utility would significantly improve its access to working capital.
With an eye-popping business case like this, it's little wonder that 6 percent of attendees to the recent Creditron Webinar stated that they plan to replace their legacy remittance processing system in the next six months, while another 6 percent of attendees said they plan to do so in the next 12 months.
So, don't let low payments processing performance be a problem of your own making.
By choosing to invest in new technology in the short-term, you can keep your operations costs low, address current and future business needs, and be in a better position to outperform your peers.
A Compelling ROI for Document Management
By Mark Brousseau
Organizations hungry for productivity gains in light of the economic downturn will likely find a compelling return on investment from document capture solutions, Andrew Pery, chief marketing officer at Kofax said this morning during a keynote presentation at TAWPI’s Capture Conference.
“If document capture is looked at as part of your mission-critical business process, and you integrate that into your business applications, then the savings are quite significant and compelling,” Pery said.
One common measure of a return on investment calculation is the average total savings over three years, divided by the cost, Pery told attendees. What factors drive this return on investment?
… Breadth – “How many people will the application affect?”
… Repeatability – “How many times a day will people use it?”
… Cost – “Is this a costly task?”
… Collaboration – “Will employees need to collaborate?”
… Knowledge – “Can I reuse the information I create?”
“One of the most important metrics is the payback -- the time period needed before net savings equal initial cost,” Pery said. “Organizations tend to pay a lot of attention to this because the shorter the payback the higher the probability the project will be adopted,” Pery explained to attendees.
Key to this payback is productivity gains from reductions in cost (direct savings), expected reductions in cost, increases in worker productivity, and increases in manager productivity.
“When someone creates an ROI analysis, particularly in these tough economic times, the focus primarily is on direct savings,” Pery said. And this is a reason for the growth of document capture. “Document capture, in terms of annual growth potential, is expected to outperform virtually every other segment of the software market because users recognize the potential direct cost savings.”
For instance, the economic value of automating invoice processing is increased processing efficiencies, improved ability to audit, improved visibility across AP, and streamlined research.
The bottom line, Pery said is to choose products and services that consider document-driven process automation as a strategic investment.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Organizations hungry for productivity gains in light of the economic downturn will likely find a compelling return on investment from document capture solutions, Andrew Pery, chief marketing officer at Kofax said this morning during a keynote presentation at TAWPI’s Capture Conference.
“If document capture is looked at as part of your mission-critical business process, and you integrate that into your business applications, then the savings are quite significant and compelling,” Pery said.
One common measure of a return on investment calculation is the average total savings over three years, divided by the cost, Pery told attendees. What factors drive this return on investment?
… Breadth – “How many people will the application affect?”
… Repeatability – “How many times a day will people use it?”
… Cost – “Is this a costly task?”
… Collaboration – “Will employees need to collaborate?”
… Knowledge – “Can I reuse the information I create?”
“One of the most important metrics is the payback -- the time period needed before net savings equal initial cost,” Pery said. “Organizations tend to pay a lot of attention to this because the shorter the payback the higher the probability the project will be adopted,” Pery explained to attendees.
Key to this payback is productivity gains from reductions in cost (direct savings), expected reductions in cost, increases in worker productivity, and increases in manager productivity.
“When someone creates an ROI analysis, particularly in these tough economic times, the focus primarily is on direct savings,” Pery said. And this is a reason for the growth of document capture. “Document capture, in terms of annual growth potential, is expected to outperform virtually every other segment of the software market because users recognize the potential direct cost savings.”
For instance, the economic value of automating invoice processing is increased processing efficiencies, improved ability to audit, improved visibility across AP, and streamlined research.
The bottom line, Pery said is to choose products and services that consider document-driven process automation as a strategic investment.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Be Open to Change
By Mark Brousseau
What’s the biggest mistake that organizations make when deploying document management solutions? Not being open to change, Dana Showers of Capture Sage said during a panel discussion today at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
“When organizations are evaluating document management solutions, they need to take a hard look at each of their requirements and determine whether it is a real business requirement or whether it is really an inefficient workaround that has become a ‘requirement,’” Showers told attendees.
“When evaluating new document management solutions, organizations should be completely open to change and work hard to determine which existing processes add value. If a process doesn’t add value, then it should be thrown out, otherwise it will cost you down the road,” Showers said.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
What’s the biggest mistake that organizations make when deploying document management solutions? Not being open to change, Dana Showers of Capture Sage said during a panel discussion today at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL.
“When organizations are evaluating document management solutions, they need to take a hard look at each of their requirements and determine whether it is a real business requirement or whether it is really an inefficient workaround that has become a ‘requirement,’” Showers told attendees.
“When evaluating new document management solutions, organizations should be completely open to change and work hard to determine which existing processes add value. If a process doesn’t add value, then it should be thrown out, otherwise it will cost you down the road,” Showers said.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Attendees Share Operations Tips
By Mark Brousseau
During an interactive networking luncheon at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale today, attendees were challenged to provide the best strategies they’ve implemented in the past year for improving their operations. Below is a sampling of the best strategies:
1. Eliminate manual reporting and move to automated real time reporting. This will help you meet your service level agreements.
2. Implement 2D barcode capabilities. The State of Georgia Department of Revenue was able to save $1 million in three months by implementing 2D barcoding.
3. Incorporate auto-classification into the capture process as early as possible.
4. Start designing your business processes with the end game in mind. Understand where you want to go, and white board it out.
5. Don't price the solution until you are done with due diligence and requirements are defined.
6. Don't just automate a manual process – upon closer inspection, you might decide to re-engineer or completely eliminate the process.
7. Design your black and white forms with a color gray that drops out on certain scanners.
8. Evaluate your processes every six months to make sure they still make sense – or haven’t morphed!
9. Use an abacus (don’t ask!).
10. Approach automation projects in phases, starting with getting buy-in.
11. Look for ways to automate exceptions processing with image technology.
12. Don't be intimated by offshore key entry.
13. Implement OCR for T&E forms and P-card forms. This saves time, money and labor.
14. Before rushing out to buy a solution, see if you can’t get significant benefits by re-engineering your processes.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
During an interactive networking luncheon at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale today, attendees were challenged to provide the best strategies they’ve implemented in the past year for improving their operations. Below is a sampling of the best strategies:
1. Eliminate manual reporting and move to automated real time reporting. This will help you meet your service level agreements.
2. Implement 2D barcode capabilities. The State of Georgia Department of Revenue was able to save $1 million in three months by implementing 2D barcoding.
3. Incorporate auto-classification into the capture process as early as possible.
4. Start designing your business processes with the end game in mind. Understand where you want to go, and white board it out.
5. Don't price the solution until you are done with due diligence and requirements are defined.
6. Don't just automate a manual process – upon closer inspection, you might decide to re-engineer or completely eliminate the process.
7. Design your black and white forms with a color gray that drops out on certain scanners.
8. Evaluate your processes every six months to make sure they still make sense – or haven’t morphed!
9. Use an abacus (don’t ask!).
10. Approach automation projects in phases, starting with getting buy-in.
11. Look for ways to automate exceptions processing with image technology.
12. Don't be intimated by offshore key entry.
13. Implement OCR for T&E forms and P-card forms. This saves time, money and labor.
14. Before rushing out to buy a solution, see if you can’t get significant benefits by re-engineering your processes.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Creating the Efficient Paperless Office
By Mark Brousseau
There’s a school of thought that the data capture and document imaging industry should have made more progress by now. “We’re talking about the same issues today that we were years ago,” Chris Preston of EMC Corporation said during a keynote presentation this morning at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. But the economic downturn may accelerate the pace of change.
“The technology has substantially improved, and we’re moving to the right direction, but we’re not getting the paper out of the organization entirely,” Preston told conference attendees. “The challenge is to more efficiently handle the paper once it’s in an organization.”
Preston noted that the economic downturn is driving the push to more efficiently handle paper. “What’s driving organizations are three basic things, and they will continue to drive organizations even in the recovery: reduce operating costs, better serve customers, and reduce risk,” Preston said.
“Organizations want to know how to deliver value faster, better, cheaper than before,” Preston said.
Preston pointed to a study conducted by EMC and The Economist that cited agility as the top priority for 88 percent of executives worldwide. “Agility is not just about speed, it’s about adaptability and the ability to adapt quickly,” Preston said, noting that agile companies grow revenues 30 percent faster according to the study. To improve agility, Preston said organizations must:
… Improve process efficiency (change management, outsourcing, automation and satisfaction)
… Improve knowledge management and information sharing processes
… Encourage and extend collaboration across the business and beyond
“Doing all of these things will provide a foundation for becoming a more agile company,” he said.
To this end, organizations are moving from an application approach to information-centric infrastructure, with a common, virtual pool of information that applications have access to, or contribute to. “This is what organizations are trying to aspire to,” Preston explained.
Standing in the way of this migration is information. “If you look at information, there is lots of it (1.8 zetabytes), it is mostly unstructured (95 percent), mostly unmanaged (85 percent), managed by organizations (85 percent), and becoming more regulated,” Preston said. “The consequences of not managing information are severe – everything from regulatory fines, impact on customer service.”
And the paper challenges facing organizations aren’t likely to change anytime soon. Preston noted that more than 20 millions of office paper is produced and consumed each year in the United States and Europe. “Paper is, and will continue to be, a critical component of business transactions. In order to drive efficiency you’ll have to find better ways to manage paper,” Preston told attendees.
“The opportunity is to look at document imaging and data capture to transform paper into business-ready information so the organization can do something with it,” Preston stated, adding that the greatest opportunity to reduce costs and enhance services lies in transactional content management.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
There’s a school of thought that the data capture and document imaging industry should have made more progress by now. “We’re talking about the same issues today that we were years ago,” Chris Preston of EMC Corporation said during a keynote presentation this morning at TAWPI’s Capture Conference in Ft. Lauderdale, FL. But the economic downturn may accelerate the pace of change.
“The technology has substantially improved, and we’re moving to the right direction, but we’re not getting the paper out of the organization entirely,” Preston told conference attendees. “The challenge is to more efficiently handle the paper once it’s in an organization.”
Preston noted that the economic downturn is driving the push to more efficiently handle paper. “What’s driving organizations are three basic things, and they will continue to drive organizations even in the recovery: reduce operating costs, better serve customers, and reduce risk,” Preston said.
“Organizations want to know how to deliver value faster, better, cheaper than before,” Preston said.
Preston pointed to a study conducted by EMC and The Economist that cited agility as the top priority for 88 percent of executives worldwide. “Agility is not just about speed, it’s about adaptability and the ability to adapt quickly,” Preston said, noting that agile companies grow revenues 30 percent faster according to the study. To improve agility, Preston said organizations must:
… Improve process efficiency (change management, outsourcing, automation and satisfaction)
… Improve knowledge management and information sharing processes
… Encourage and extend collaboration across the business and beyond
“Doing all of these things will provide a foundation for becoming a more agile company,” he said.
To this end, organizations are moving from an application approach to information-centric infrastructure, with a common, virtual pool of information that applications have access to, or contribute to. “This is what organizations are trying to aspire to,” Preston explained.
Standing in the way of this migration is information. “If you look at information, there is lots of it (1.8 zetabytes), it is mostly unstructured (95 percent), mostly unmanaged (85 percent), managed by organizations (85 percent), and becoming more regulated,” Preston said. “The consequences of not managing information are severe – everything from regulatory fines, impact on customer service.”
And the paper challenges facing organizations aren’t likely to change anytime soon. Preston noted that more than 20 millions of office paper is produced and consumed each year in the United States and Europe. “Paper is, and will continue to be, a critical component of business transactions. In order to drive efficiency you’ll have to find better ways to manage paper,” Preston told attendees.
“The opportunity is to look at document imaging and data capture to transform paper into business-ready information so the organization can do something with it,” Preston stated, adding that the greatest opportunity to reduce costs and enhance services lies in transactional content management.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Slower Distributed Capture Growth?
By Mark Brousseau
Panelists at TAWPI’s Capture Conference admitted that they were surprised by the slowdown in growth of distributed capture solutions reported by TAWPI’s 2009 Document Management Study.
“When we looked at the report, we thought it was a very interesting statistic,” said Andrew Pery, chief marketing officer at Kofax, said during the panel discussion this morning in Ft. Lauderdale. “Based on our own experiences in the market, both distributed capture and remote capture are proliferating and there is increased adoption for both because of the benefits they provide.”
“The study shows that global and Fortune 500 companies are the primary users of distributed capture solutions with smaller firms using it in a more limited basis,” said Dana Showers of Capture Sage.
KeyMark CEO Jim Wanner told attendees that the recession has undoubtedly played a role in distributed capture “not taking off.” But Wanner said there is another issue within organizations that may be inhibiting growth: “There is a huge disconnect between the individuals responsible for scanning and the individuals making decisions on MFP devices. These individuals frequently don’t communicate effectively on how to solve the challenge of capture within the organization.’
The results of the TAWPI aside, the panelists saw growth ahead for distributed and remote capture.
“Distributed capture will continue to grow,” predicted Ken Kriz, manager of strategic alliances for AnyDoc Software. “But it can’t grow at its previous pace because it cannot overtake centralized scanning. Some organizations will utilize distributed capture, and some of them will not.”
“The use of Citrix has really taken off, which will help distributed processing,” Showers added.
Pery noted that despite the popularity of ATM banking, 63 percent of respondents to a recent study said they prefer to interact with a bank branch employee – illustrating that the ability to deploy remote capture solutions and multi-function devices are becoming more strategic. “We’re also seeing expanded use of capture at the fringes of the enterprise, such as with field agents,” he said.
Going forward, the panelists saw mobile phones as another remote input stream for images.
“High-production users won’t use cell phones to scan documents in the back office, but they might be one of the inputs into a high-production system,” Kriz told conference attendees.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Panelists at TAWPI’s Capture Conference admitted that they were surprised by the slowdown in growth of distributed capture solutions reported by TAWPI’s 2009 Document Management Study.
“When we looked at the report, we thought it was a very interesting statistic,” said Andrew Pery, chief marketing officer at Kofax, said during the panel discussion this morning in Ft. Lauderdale. “Based on our own experiences in the market, both distributed capture and remote capture are proliferating and there is increased adoption for both because of the benefits they provide.”
“The study shows that global and Fortune 500 companies are the primary users of distributed capture solutions with smaller firms using it in a more limited basis,” said Dana Showers of Capture Sage.
KeyMark CEO Jim Wanner told attendees that the recession has undoubtedly played a role in distributed capture “not taking off.” But Wanner said there is another issue within organizations that may be inhibiting growth: “There is a huge disconnect between the individuals responsible for scanning and the individuals making decisions on MFP devices. These individuals frequently don’t communicate effectively on how to solve the challenge of capture within the organization.’
The results of the TAWPI aside, the panelists saw growth ahead for distributed and remote capture.
“Distributed capture will continue to grow,” predicted Ken Kriz, manager of strategic alliances for AnyDoc Software. “But it can’t grow at its previous pace because it cannot overtake centralized scanning. Some organizations will utilize distributed capture, and some of them will not.”
“The use of Citrix has really taken off, which will help distributed processing,” Showers added.
Pery noted that despite the popularity of ATM banking, 63 percent of respondents to a recent study said they prefer to interact with a bank branch employee – illustrating that the ability to deploy remote capture solutions and multi-function devices are becoming more strategic. “We’re also seeing expanded use of capture at the fringes of the enterprise, such as with field agents,” he said.
Going forward, the panelists saw mobile phones as another remote input stream for images.
“High-production users won’t use cell phones to scan documents in the back office, but they might be one of the inputs into a high-production system,” Kriz told conference attendees.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
Payback Time: Evaluating Document Capture ROI
Posted by Mark Brousseau
Calculating return-on-investment (ROI) is all about the numbers, and the simpler the better. But be careful to focus on the right numbers or you risk missing process improvements that really count. KeyMark Inc.'s Brian Becker explains:
For any document capture system where you put automation in play – whether basic indexing, or complex document classification – simple recognition rates would seem to be the obvious measure. The reality, though, is that simple optical character recognition (OCR) and classification rates tell only part of the story, and often only a secondary part at that.
Ready. Aim…
Take a minute to list the goals for your document capture system – the factors specific to your business needs that will define success or failure of the project at the most basic level.
Now look over that list. Whether you listed two goals or a dozen, OCR recognition rate is likely not among them. That is because the real factors that drive your bottom-line ROI will be things such as:
... Efficiency improvements / Reduced manual labor
... Higher throughput (quicker availability of documents)
... Quality improvements (fewer errors = fewer corrections and improved customer experience)
While recognition rate does play a part, it tends to have little meaning on its own. It can be useful (specifically during system tuning), but it will always be secondary when measuring system results
It’s all about... You
The key to optimal analysis of your system is to identify the most important goals for your business. What business problem are you attempting to solve? What are the measurable parameters for your goals that indicate success?
For each area to be measured, what is your target? This might be a percentage reduction in number of errors, or maybe a specific number of documents-per-hour per operator. Use whatever makes sense in your environment for determining the benefit of the new system.
Is your goal to allow each of your operators to continue to classify and index your current document volume, but in half the time? Measure system throughput (per FTE-hour) and see how it stacks up to your old numbers.
Is your goal to reduce indexing errors by X percent? Analyze a sampling of work performed the old way, and compare the error rate to that from a similar sampling of work performed using the new system.
When complete, your list of goals and targets should be a solid basis (along with associated cost factors) for calculating the ROI, both planned and actual.
By the way, once you get your new system in place there is a good chance you will identify additional benefits, and will want to measure and compare these to the old process. While it may be beneficial to do so, be careful to keep your focus on areas of measurement that tie directly to your justification for the project. Since your goal is to measure actual vs. planned ROI, if you step outside of the original boundaries be sure to treat that separately.
What matters most
In the end, the success of the system will hinge on a solid design and implementation, with recognition rates playing an important, but limited part. A well-designed system can provide a great ROI even with mediocre recognition rates, whereas even the best recognition rates cannot overcome poor design or execution. It’s the total package that counts. (And, of course, you do want the best recognition rates on top of the best system!)
When you evaluate the success of your system, numbers don’t lie. Just be sure you’re looking at the full picture so you can be confident that you are measuring the parameters that tell the real story. Get it right and you will know exactly when you have achieved success.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Calculating return-on-investment (ROI) is all about the numbers, and the simpler the better. But be careful to focus on the right numbers or you risk missing process improvements that really count. KeyMark Inc.'s Brian Becker explains:
For any document capture system where you put automation in play – whether basic indexing, or complex document classification – simple recognition rates would seem to be the obvious measure. The reality, though, is that simple optical character recognition (OCR) and classification rates tell only part of the story, and often only a secondary part at that.
Ready. Aim…
Take a minute to list the goals for your document capture system – the factors specific to your business needs that will define success or failure of the project at the most basic level.
Now look over that list. Whether you listed two goals or a dozen, OCR recognition rate is likely not among them. That is because the real factors that drive your bottom-line ROI will be things such as:
... Efficiency improvements / Reduced manual labor
... Higher throughput (quicker availability of documents)
... Quality improvements (fewer errors = fewer corrections and improved customer experience)
While recognition rate does play a part, it tends to have little meaning on its own. It can be useful (specifically during system tuning), but it will always be secondary when measuring system results
It’s all about... You
The key to optimal analysis of your system is to identify the most important goals for your business. What business problem are you attempting to solve? What are the measurable parameters for your goals that indicate success?
For each area to be measured, what is your target? This might be a percentage reduction in number of errors, or maybe a specific number of documents-per-hour per operator. Use whatever makes sense in your environment for determining the benefit of the new system.
Is your goal to allow each of your operators to continue to classify and index your current document volume, but in half the time? Measure system throughput (per FTE-hour) and see how it stacks up to your old numbers.
Is your goal to reduce indexing errors by X percent? Analyze a sampling of work performed the old way, and compare the error rate to that from a similar sampling of work performed using the new system.
When complete, your list of goals and targets should be a solid basis (along with associated cost factors) for calculating the ROI, both planned and actual.
By the way, once you get your new system in place there is a good chance you will identify additional benefits, and will want to measure and compare these to the old process. While it may be beneficial to do so, be careful to keep your focus on areas of measurement that tie directly to your justification for the project. Since your goal is to measure actual vs. planned ROI, if you step outside of the original boundaries be sure to treat that separately.
What matters most
In the end, the success of the system will hinge on a solid design and implementation, with recognition rates playing an important, but limited part. A well-designed system can provide a great ROI even with mediocre recognition rates, whereas even the best recognition rates cannot overcome poor design or execution. It’s the total package that counts. (And, of course, you do want the best recognition rates on top of the best system!)
When you evaluate the success of your system, numbers don’t lie. Just be sure you’re looking at the full picture so you can be confident that you are measuring the parameters that tell the real story. Get it right and you will know exactly when you have achieved success.
What do you think? Post your comments below.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
TAWPI Releases Findings on Payment Processing Benchmark Report
TAWPI has just released the findings of our 2009-2010 Payments Processing Benchmark Study. The study is the most up to date, comprehensive study ever produced on current and future trends in payment processing including mail, lockbox and remittance operations. The report examines the productivity and cost of processing payments through an analysis of various functions such as:
- Measurement of payment processing performance across dozens of benchmarking dimensions, including volume adjusted cost per item for both clean and exception items.
- Integration levels of front-end payments systems with back-end ERP platforms (e.g., SAP, PeopleSoft, etc.)
- Data on the adoption of ARC and Check 21 image deposits and statistics on the growth of biller direct recurring payments using ACH, debit and credit cards
- Feasibility and cost justifications for in-house versus outsourcing of various payment functions
For more information and to obtain the results click here and be directed to the TAWPI website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
