Our client is a firm of accountants with around 200 staff who had been using their document management system for seven years and were looking to review whether it was still the right fit for them.
The firm generally had systems which had worked for them but had become outdated and were so no longer suited to their requirements. They were frustrated with the slow pace of their DMS provider in providing a cloud development roadmap. This led to a disjointed user experience alongside their move to Office 365 and Teams. Furthermore, the firm outsourced work offshore and the DMS was unable to facilitate this collaboration in an easy and secure way.
The firm wanted to make email filing easier and more intuitive so that users did it more of the time. They also were becoming more open, than they had been previously, to finding the best fit for each department rather than a one-size-must-fit-all approach where everyone had to compromise. The firm wanted to explore opportunities to allow different service lines to work differently with a new product.
We carried out interviews with internal stakeholders to discuss the firm’s document management processes and better understand their use of the current system requirements going forward. We ran a user survey to elicit direct feedback from the broader user base. We used the feedback to create a requirements specification for the DMS.
We carried out a comprehensive review of a cross-section of the market to identify and evaluate viable alternatives to the current DMS. This involved building on our already-deep market knowledge and working with vendors to verify their true, current ability to meet the firm’s requirements. This also included a detailed comparison with the product roadmap of the firm’s existing DMS, in which they had invested considerable time and money.
We applied a structured framework to evaluate competing solutions. We prepared a report on the findings, options and recommendations and presented this back to the firm for review and discussion.
The firm had a better understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of the current system and their own needs and could match these against the leading solutions available in the wider market. They had a comprehensive gap analysis of their current solution against these alternatives. They could also see where there working practice could improve.
The firm had clarity on their requirements and a structured framework to help them evaluate alternative solutions as well as recommendations based on broad and deep market knowledge and up to date investigations that helped guide their decision-making process. They reached their decision using a robust process, instilling confidence across the partners.