13 comments

• 

  Corey Smith

  1 year ago

  touché
  reply
• 

  Chris Wacker

  1 year ago

  The reason a document is copied, 16 to 20 times, is that people are not certain that they will see it again, so they make copies for their own files.
  
  I can only speak for Laserfiche as an EDMS when I say that people have confidence that when a document is scanned it can be instantly viewed by multiple people simultaneously, without concern that it will be lost or misplaced by anyone.
  reply
• 

  ChangeForge | Ken Stewart

  1 year ago

  Chris, I would like to say thank you for your comments. You are most welcome here.
  
  Specifically to your point, there is some point of contention in the industry as to the term used, but suffice it to say a document is "produced" between 16 and 20 times.
  
  In point of fact, this trend has been on the increase specfically in printing, not copying. According to Gartner, copy volumes are on the decline (or flat at best), while printing volumes continue to rise.
  
  This trend is indicative of a wasteful society moreso than people misplacing the "copy". My assertion would be that 'they' actually throw the originals away because the attitude is, "we can always print another". Gartner's figures would support this, as would my own observations as I consult with company after company who has very little control over their output fleets, and marginalizes the impact this has on the environment. Even for the "greenest" of companies this is true - I can assure you.
  
  If LaserFiche would like to post a rebuttal article, I will be happy to display on the front page of my blog.
  
  Again, thank you for your comments and your feedback is most welcome here.
  reply
• 

  George Fredericks

  1 year ago

  I think most of this "green" trend is pie in the sky marketing mumbo-jumbo. The only reason it is ever posted is because someone thinks that some environmentalist is going to say, "Oh, that LaserFiche is amazing... we have to do business with them because they save trees."
  
  I am amazed at how much from the copier and document imaging industry I have seen posted lately on the stupid "green" movement <s>in this ten year period of dropping temperatures</s> because of global warming.
  reply
• 

  ChangeForge | Ken Stewart

  1 year ago

  George, to a certain extent, I agree with my disappointment in the "me too" approach of the document industry.
  
  As a counter-point to this, at least there is more awareness of a problem today than 5 years ago when people were still in some levels of denial.
  
  All smart companies will see what is a current "hot button" in the world and attempt to create opportunities, and that's not a bad thing to engender some good will or even make a few bucks.
  
  This is to say that they are actually helping to solve the issue, but unfortunately many in this boat will sadly attempt to use it as an opportunity to just make off with some dough. Look to the horizon for companies that are truly walking the walk, not just talking the talk.
  reply
• 

  George Fredericks

  1 year ago

  Awareness? What does that mean? What problem? How would that help if there was a problem? There are more trees now than 100 years ago in the United States. Source: http://rainforests.mongabay.com/deforestation/"
  
  How does a claim of saving trees have on the impact of anything based in reality? Especially when the trees used for making paper are grown for that purpose and not taken from natural growth anymore? Source: <a href="http://www.tappi.org/paperu/all_about_paper/earth_answers/GrowTree1.htm"
  reply
• 

  Sue Allen

  1 year ago

  I bet that Laserfiche didn't even consider the impact of document management on trees until their marketing guru said that it tested well in some focus group.
  
  It was marketing by convenience.
  reply
• 

  ChangeForge | Ken Stewart

  1 year ago

  George, I do not pretend to be an environmental expert. I leave that to my wife.
  
  To your point on the claim of saving trees having an impact of anything based in reality, I suppose you should review current scientific evidence on global warming and make up your own mind (if in fact it is not already made-up). I have been given to understand it is in point of fact the deforestation of tropical rainforests that are of more concern than within the US. However, I would defer to those more expert than myself on this subject.
  
  I would also not infer that saving those tress made for paper-consumption would have a dramatic impact on the present state of the environment - at least as a major contributing factor.
  
  I am more inclined to agree with the recent post from Sue, but that would be supposition on my part. Since I was not present for the focus group, nor for the marketing exercises - I could not make that assertion, however.
  reply
• 

  George Fredericks

  1 year ago

  I am pretty sure that a lot of the scientific data is made up like you suggest :)
  
  The New York Times wrote scary articles about cooling in 1924, warming in 1935, and back to cooling in 1975. So called "smart people" have been talking about Global Warming now yet the temperature as decreased since 1998 and the World Meteorlogical Organization says that 2008 will be cooler as well.
  
  Crap... there I go on my soap box again.
  
  Bottom line, you and I seem to agree that it is more of a marketing move than an actual "Save the Trees - Save the Environment" kind of thing.
  reply
• 

  GregWalters

  1 year ago

  Wow.
  
  So, it isn't just me? All this Green stuff?
  
  I actually love it.
  
  Global Warming, phut! Ted Danson - yeah, right.
  
  But, people are BUYING IT.
  
  It's not really a "Barnum Effect" - it's the high cost of energy, and the reduction in energy use means a more significant reduction in operating cost...
  reply
• 

  ChangeForge | Ken Stewart

  1 year ago

  Yes... I personally do believe there are issues with the global environment, and some of the initiatives are great. However, I must say I despise companies attempting to capitalize on it for their own ends.
  reply
• 

  Web Design

  3 months ago

  I think there is the clause for iso 9002 IT, you need to shift your company towards a paper less office. Where it will help stop deforestation it also makes work easier and faster and office can be more neat than before.
  reply
• 

  ChangeForge | Ken Stewart

  3 months ago

  Web Design, I would agree this would be a concept, but from my experience printing in an environment is not reduced due to an EDM - at least not in the first phase of evolution. Quite possibly this becomes a second or third phase result, but the culture of a company really has to change. Now that environmentalism has more of a foothold here in the US, this may change. But the point of this article was that the company in question used statistics that really didn't add up.
  reply