Author: Onit

HBR Law Department Survey: A Great Benchmarking Opportunity for Onit Customers

Posted on August 9, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Company News and Events

As a valued Onit customer, we wanted to pass along an opportunity to participate in HBR Consulting’s 2018 Law Department Survey. This is a survey that many of our clients find valuable and have contributed to in prior years.

Recently, the survey has been expanded to include a number of technology questions to help provide a holistic view of the legal technology landscape. At Onit, we are especially looking forward to seeing the market’s feedback on how our customer satisfaction compares to others in the space as we strive for continuous improvement. Of note, Onit is listed in the e-billing, matter management, and workflow tools questions in the survey.

The survey has been a leading source of benchmarking data for general counsel and legal operations leaders for 14+ years, and over this time period has included 65% of the Fortune 500 across 22 industries. In addition to technology, the survey captures valuable data regarding legal spending, staffing, operations, and outside counsel management.

As a participant, you will receive a complimentary summary of the results in the fall of 2018, access to HBR’s regional benchmarking roundtables and discounts on the detailed results package.

If you haven’t already completed the survey in 2018, HBR has provided a link and extended the deadline to August 31.

Should you have any questions regarding the survey, please feel free to contact HBR’s survey team at [email protected] or visit www.lawdepartmentsurvey.com

3 Big Essentials to Look for in an Enterprise Solution Provider

Posted on August 8, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Contract Lifecycle Management, Enterprise Legal Management

The time inevitably comes when most legal departments need to enhance their process automation, while others may be looking for their first automation solution. There are many things to keep in mind when researching providers and doing due diligence, but we don’t want to overwhelm you with a long list right now. For the purpose of this blog, there are three critical things we wanted to share with you — three of the most basic things you should be looking for in a solution provider:

  1. Enterprise Solutions – The provider should be capitalizing on the broad applicability of workflow-based task management, and eager to expand into functional areas outside of legal and aggressively solicit customer needs to write custom applications for other corporate-wide departments. Whether it’s an off-the-shelf solution or a platform on which the client can create their own applications, a provider that is well-versed in developing solutions for both legal and non-legal applications could be the way to go.
  2. Process Automation –  A workflow-centric approach that seeks to deconstruct matter management into independent, collaborative functional lifecycles that lawyers and operations managers use on a regular basis is critical. An a la carte model can empower users to add capabilities and components as needed. The ability to scale your enterprise legal management system in a manner consistent with operational requirements is your key to success.
  3. System Architecture – The providers that are on top of their game offer a modern architecture that showcases class-leading technology and a decidedly Saas-based approach to legal business application management. It needs to be flexible and agile, and designed for rapid deployment, flexibility and agility. Last but not least, it needs to work the way your team works.

If these three things are at the top of your list when you begin your search for a solution provider you’ll be a huge step ahead of the game.

Legal Thought Leader Matt DenOuden Offers Insight on Enterprise Legal Management Space and Future of the Industry

Posted on August 6, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Company News and Events

We’re excited to announce our latest podcast! In this episode, Onit’s Matt DenOuden, VP of Global Sales shares his thoughts about our company and customers. After he relates his story of how he came to Onit, Matt discusses how Onit is unique and explains what it is that makes our enterprise legal solution successful and drive value. He mentions that Onit is also unique in that we were one of the first to really think about “intake” and to subsequently develop a software solution.

Matt then speaks about some of our recent successes, such as a SOX compliance solution out on the West coast, as well as solutions for employee onboarding, travel approvals and IT ticketing. He then talks about one of our biggest customer success stories: Archer Daniels Midland currently has Onit solutions up and running along with a new claims management solution that is currently being built. Matt then moves on to his thoughts on the future of legal technology by explaining that we need to have a more combined, coalesced platform to serve the legal community’s needs. Finally, he offers comfort to those who fear change and are perhaps wary of technology, “Our software is designed to enable the work that you are already doing…we try to be as non-disruptive and nonintrusive as possible. You should be in our software as seldom as possible. Our software should be following you around and helping you do your work.”

Listen to episode 4 on iTunes

Embracing Legal Department Transformation with Technology: Legal Service Requests

Posted on August 3, 2018 by - Business Process Management

In our new white paper, Embracing Legal Department Transformation with Technology, we investigate the new legal department landscape and how a legal service request solution (LSR) is a key player in the makeover.

Legal departments have enough “real” legal work on their plates even without taking into account all of the daily administrative tasks. Now more than ever, legal departments are slowly changing the way they work. Their objectives can come slowly or quickly, and sometimes they get it right; sometimes it’s hit-and-miss. It’s crucial that the legal department be allowed to focus more on the real legal work, without sinking deeper into the administrative quagmire. In many cases, a well-chosen and effective technology solution is the best answer. But driving and implementing change is another key element in the solution. Keeping up to date with the latest technology is always good, but to implement a technology transformation requires buy-in from leadership and IT, as well as an unwavering commitment to see the project through.

A cutting-edge legal service request solution is key in bringing about transformation relatively easily and cost-effectively. By implementing an intelligent, self-service portal to initiate LSRs, the first phase of the battle is already won. The company will also be able to leverage their new system, since information can be shared across departments and systems. Fewer staff members will need to spend time entering data for the same client and matter, which saves money. All of this will allow the legal department to spend more time focusing on the needs of business consumers – not following up on paperwork and other purely administrative and time-consuming tasks.With a well-chosen legal service request solution, the legal department can provide higher quality services, operate more efficiently, and become a driving force in fueling the company’s success.

Download this this white paper to learn more about:

  • Legal service request market trends
  • Industry best practices
  • Benefits of the right solution
  • The mistakes of falling into the “consensual neglect” trap

Enterprise Legal Management Insufficiencies? Don’t Be So Hasty with that RFP

Posted on August 2, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Enterprise Legal Management

Some companies struggle with their current enterprise legal management (ELM) systems that focus on just core matter and spend management. But when the day comes that they discover there are other business processes that also need automated solutions, it’s time to issue another RFP and undergo another long, expensive and drawn-out path to implementation.

But we’d like to offer another solution. We believe we should be looking at the elements of enterprise legal management as processproblems instead of data problems. When we do this, we’re clearly taking more ownership in business process management (BPM), even though we may not immediately realize it. And in order for corporate legal to be a true corporate citizen, it needs to have a deeper stake in business processes. If you already use automated process solutions, congratulations. You already have a stake since business process automation is inseparable from business process management.

Again, ELM systems that are only capable of core matter and spend management have a clear disadvantage. But on the other end of the spectrum are systems that are loaded with features that will never be used; either because the company doesn’t need them or they don’t want to use them. These solutions were likely an outsize investment to begin with, which already puts the company at a distinct disadvantage. But the situation needn’t be so bleak, and it’s not even necessary to proceed on a quest to find a happy spot somewhere on the spectrum.

The ability to scale your Enterprise Legal Management System in a manner consistent with operational requirements is your key to success.

Seems simple, but how do we do it? By breaking up enterprise legal management into discrete, individual task-based processes, it becomes clear that an “app-based” solution is the most logical way to go. With these, users have the ability to develop and incorporate these discrete process capabilities into the larger enterprise system as they are needed – a la carte. The old “ELM as monolith” approach is, for the majority of legal departments, obsolete. The resounding answer is that we should be looking at ELM as a process problem, rather than a data problem.

Smart companies are now seeking core matter management and e-billing functionality that can be augmented with other process solutions as they are needed. With such systems, scaling could not be easier. In many cases, a company will already have an existing ELM installation, and augment it with process solutions from other providers. These add-ons will be completely compatible with their existing ELM system. There are off-the-shelf, focused solutions as well as platforms on which the company can build their own custom solutions. In any case, the ability to enhance and optimize your system without going the painful RFP route is always a good thing.

Staying the Course with Your Subpar Process Automation Strategy? Think Twice

Posted on August 1, 2018 by - Business Process Management, Enterprise Legal Management

In our new white paper, Embracing Legal Department Transformation with Technology, we investigate the new legal department landscape and how a legal service request solution is a key player in the makeover. But this blog focuses on one section in this paper, “The Case of Consensual Neglect,” which we feel deserves a bit more airtime.

Successful transformation with technology usually comes with a price tag attached. Those who are willing to put in the time, effort, research and money likely stand a better chance of success than those who skimp on any or all of these four factors. Which brings us to another point on the spectrum where we find people who insist on being committed to an irrational or failing strategy. In some cases, the strategy in question was once successful, which can add salt to the wound by means of the “sentiment” factor. In the Harvard Business Review Professors Freek Vermeulen and Niro Sivanathan detail a number of biases that explain why leaders stay committed to failing strategies. Dubbed “consensual neglect” by Karl Weick of the University of Michigan this is a very real phenomenon that hurts businesses in the near and long term:

In combination, these biases lead a company’s decision makers to ignore signals that their strategy is no longer working. It is what Karl Weick, of the University of Michigan, calls consensual neglect: the tendency of organizational decision makers to tacitly ignore events that undermine their current strategy and double down on the initial decision in order to justify their prior actions. 1

Here are six of the most common biases as described by Vermeulen and Sivanathan: 2

  1. The sunk cost fallacy, in which people focus on the investment already made in a particular course of action and hope that, if the approach is continued, invested costs will be recouped and the prior investment decision vindicated
  2. Loss aversion, in which people prefer to gamble on the future success of a previous commitment to a currently questionable strategy – even if it means the investment of additional resources – rather than to incur an immediate loss by changing direction
  3. The illusion of control, in which people regularly overestimate their ability to control future events, thus reinforcing the first two biases described above
  4. Preference for completion, the inherent bias of people toward completion of tasks, such as seeing a particular course of action through
  5. Pluralistic ignorance, in which people who might disagree with a particular course of action remain silent because they think they are the only dissenters and that everyone else is on board
  6. Personal identification, in which people perceive that their identities and social status are tied to their commitments and that withdrawing their support for a course of action they previously approved would risk loss of reputation or status

According to research, this phenomenon of consensual neglect is fixed deeply in our brains, making us more apt to stay the course with a particular strategy – even when it is clearly not the best, or even failing. Worse yet, some companies will double down on their old strategy instead of trying something new, sending them further into a downward spiral. This can easily apply to every facet of a company, but we’re focusing on driving technology transformations. Again, the right technology is readily available to those who genuinely want to avoid falling prey to consensual neglect.

1, 2  Freek Vermeulen and Niro Sivanathan, “Stop Doubling Down on Your Failing Strategy – How to Spot (and Escape) One before It’s Too Late,” Harvard Business Review, Nov.-Dec. 2017, at 110-17.

Your Guide to Seamless Legal Tech Implementation: Part 2 — Get Project Stakeholders on Board

Posted on July 30, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Part two of a three-part “Guide to Seamless Legal Tech Implementation” Parts one and three are below.

Part 1 – Scoping the Project Before Buying
Part 3 – Change Management Before and After Implementation

The importance of stakeholder engagement is vital, both during technology project definition and implementation. So how can you identify key project stakeholders and get the buy-in required?

As you read in part one, collecting and analyzing stakeholder and end users’ requirements is a crucial enabler of success when designing and implementing a new system. It is possible to outline solution requirements without considering stakeholder needs, but to do so presents a real but avoidable risk of project failure.

Some of these stakeholder groups or individuals may be fully on board and require little management regarding expectations. However, there are likely to be key stakeholders who will have other priorities or may be resistant to the change that a new software tool brings.

When software projects fail to deliver expected benefits because of stakeholder/end-user issues, these projects fall into two categories:

  • Those that do not independently verify stakeholder requirements (“one of the users said this, so that’s what we must do”)
  • Those that treat project stakeholders and their requirements as a kind of inconvenient truth (“they exist but we don’t really agree with them/want to listen to them”)
  • Neither of these positions are desirable or helpful. However, it is possible to mitigate them.

WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO ACHIEVE?

Effective solution selection requires understanding the needs of all stakeholders and the ultimate users of the application.

As learned in part one, producing a scope document helps eliminate confusion within the project by managing expectations from the start. With the users’ needs captured, you can define the objectives of the software purchase and identify additional project stakeholders.

IDENTIFYING THE PROJECT STAKEHOLDERS

After defining the project objectives, identify the relevant stakeholders. Gather their requirements and learn the solution’s impact on their teams. A successful project requires the buy-in from not only the legal department, but of the entire management level. If you miss the input of some project stakeholders can seriously affect the successful implementation of your software. Stakeholder identification can be time-consuming as it may include parties beyond immediately obvious ones. Who are typical stakeholders? There are immediate system users (for e-billing, this would be accounting and legal/legal operations), but there are also legal service providers and law firms, sales, IT, and procurement users.

A structured and consistent approach can help you identify stakeholders and their roles. Tools and techniques include focused interviews, multi-media communications, surveys, role-playing, and follow-up action workshops. This will ensure stakeholder groups are fully engaged and supported.

USING THE INFORMATION

Once you capture the stakeholder requirements, the next stage is interpreting the results and choosing what to act on. At this stage, achieving balance is vital; keep the stakeholder who shouted the loudest from dominating the requirements. Remember what the legal department is trying to accomplish and select only those items of feedback that will help. Try to prevent the project scope from becoming too broad. Remember that the best solutions are both effective and efficient and that a positive ROI will measure success.

If you have access to an experienced project manager/analyst, they can record and interpret the results of the stakeholder and user sessions and feed the conclusions into the overall project requirements.

ONGOING COMMUNICATIONS

Finally, it is essential to let stakeholders know what you have done with their feedback and why. This is vital to engage them in the project.

You cannot always please all project stakeholders, so use data-based justification for the decisions taken when you can. Stakeholders, particularly the primary users, can make the new process sink or swim. When it comes to implementation, you will need their support to encourage their teams and peers to use the new system. While they may not like what they hear, they value the reach out (and will find out in the end anyway).

Finally, you will need to continue using the stakeholders for validation of the project as it progresses, primarily to ensure that the delivered system does not “drift” from the agreed objectives and to check that the original requirements are still valid as they may change time. This is also a benefit of having a scope document. Plenty of applications have gone live to a user population that says, “great, but that’s not what we need now!”

THINGS TO CONSIDER FOR EFFECTIVE STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT

So, what lessons are there for those involved in system selection and implementation?

  • Be clear on what the project is trying to accomplish?
  • Identify the project stakeholders in context; what are their roles and responsibilities?
  • Use relevant capture methods; keep them consistent and unbiased.
  • Incorporate the feedback into the solution requirements. Maintain balance and remind yourself of the project objectives.
  • Keep the stakeholders informed of the consultation outcomes and be prepared to adapt the project if it doesn’t achieve the agreed objectives.

Part 1 – Scoping the Project Before Buying
Part 3 – Change Management Before and After Implementation

LEGAL TECH ERFOLGREICH IMPLEMENTIEREN: PROJEKTBETEILIGTE MIT INS BOOT HOLEN 

Posted on July 30, 2018 by - Enterprise Legal Management

Diese dreiteilige Blogserie ist ein Leitfaden für die Umsetzung eines erfolgreichen juristischen Technologieprojekts. Dies ist Teil zwei. Klicken Sie unten, um Teil eins und drei zu lesen: 

Teil 1 – Projektumfang vor dem Lauf einer neuen Technologie definieren 
Teil 3 – Change Management während und nach der Implementierung 

Dieser Leitfaden zeigt die wichtigsten Bereiche auf, die es bei der Implementierung einer Rechtstechnologie zu berücksichtigen gilt. 

Die Einbindung von Interessengruppen ist sowohl bei der Definition von Technologieprojekten als auch bei deren Umsetzung von entscheidender Bedeutung. Wie können Sie also die wichtigsten Projektbeteiligten ermitteln und die erforderliche Zustimmung erhalten? Wie Sie im ersten Teil gelesen haben, ist die Erfassung und Analyse der Anforderungen von Interessenvertretern und Endnutzern ein entscheidender Faktor für den Erfolg bei der Entwicklung und Implementierung eines neuen Systems. Natürlich ist es möglich (und leider auch häufig der Fall), die Anforderungen an die Lösung zu skizzieren, ohne die Bedürfnisse der Interessengruppen zu berücksichtigen, aber dies birgt ein reales, aber vermeidbares Risiko des Scheiterns des Projekts. 

Einige dieser Stakeholder-Gruppen oder Einzelpersonen sind möglicherweise voll und ganz dabei, unterstützen das Projekt und benötigen nur sehr wenig Management in Bezug auf ihre Erwartungen. Allerdings gibt es wahrscheinlich auch wichtige Interessengruppen, die andere Prioritäten haben oder sich gegen die Veränderungen wehren, die ein neues Software-Tool mit sich bringt. 

Wenn Softwareprojekte aufgrund von Problemen mit den Beteiligten/Endnutzern nicht den erwarteten Nutzen bringen, lassen sich diese Projekte in zwei Kategorien einteilen: 

  • Diejenigen, die die Anforderungen der Stakeholder nicht unabhängig verifizieren („einer der Benutzer hat das gesagt, also müssen wir das tun“) 
  • Diejenigen, die die Projektbeteiligten und ihre Anforderungen als eine Art unbequeme Wahrheit behandeln („es gibt sie, aber wir stimmen nicht wirklich mit ihnen überein/ wollen ihnen nicht zuhören“) 

Beide Positionen sind weder wünschenswert noch hilfreich, und beide lassen sich relativieren. 

PROJEKTZIELE DEFINIEREN 

Eine effektive Lösungsauswahl erfordert ein Verständnis der Bedürfnisse aller Beteiligten und der Endnutzer der Anwendung. 

Wie im ersten Teil erläutert, trägt die Erstellung eines Scope Dokuments dazu bei, Verwirrung innerhalb des Projekts zu vermeiden, da die Erwartungen von Anfang an gesteuert werden. Mit der Erfassung der Benutzerbedürfnisse werden die Ziele des Softwarekaufs definiert und zusätzliche Projektbeteiligte können identifiziert werden. 

IDENTIFIZIERUNG DER PROJEKTBETEILIGTEN 

Nachdem die Projektziele definiert wurden, ermitteln Sie die relevanten Interessengruppen. Erfassen Sie deren Anforderungen sowie die Auswirkungen der Lösung auf ihre Teams. Ein erfolgreiches Projekt muss nicht nur von der Rechtsabteilung, sondern auch von oben nach unten getragen werden. Wenn die Projektbeteiligten ignoriert wurden, kann dies die erfolgreiche Implementierung Ihrer Software ernsthaft beeinträchtigen. Die Identifizierung der Stakeholder kann eine zeitaufwändige Aufgabe sein, da es sich dabei um Parteien handeln kann, die nicht nur auf den ersten Blick erkennbar sind. Wer sind typische Stakeholder? Die unmittelbaren Systemnutzer (bei eBilling wären dies die Buchhaltung und die Rechtsabteilung/ Legal Operations), aber auch Rechtsdienstleister und Anwaltskanzleien, der Vertrieb, die IT-Abteilung und das Beschaffungswesen sind potenzielle weitere Beteiligte. 

Ein strukturierter und kohärenter Ansatz kann Ihnen helfen, die Interessengruppen und ihre Rollen zu ermitteln. Zu den Instrumenten und Techniken gehören gezielte Interviews, Multimedia-Kommunikation, Umfragen, Rollenspiele und Workshops zur Nachbereitung von Maßnahmen. Auf diese Weise wird sichergestellt, dass die Stakeholder-Gruppen umfassend einbezogen und unterstützt werden. 

VERWENDUNG DER INFORMATIONEN 

Nachdem Sie die Anforderungen der Interessengruppen erfasst haben, geht es in der nächsten Phase darum, die Ergebnisse zu interpretieren und zu entscheiden, welche Maßnahmen ergriffen werden sollen.  In dieser Phase ist Ausgewogenheit wichtig: lassen Sie nicht zu, dass der Stakeholder, der am lautesten ist, die Anforderungen dominiert.  Denken Sie daran, was die Rechtsabteilung zu erreichen versucht, und wählen Sie nur diejenigen Rückmeldungen aus, die dazu beitragen. Versuchen Sie zu vermeiden, dass der Projektumfang zu groß wird. Denken Sie auch daran, dass die besten Lösungen sowohl effektiv als auch effizient sind und dass ein positiver ROI ein Maßstab für den Erfolg sein wird. 

Wenn Sie Zugang zu einem erfahrenen Projektmanager/Analysten haben, wird dieser in der Lage sein, die Ergebnisse der Stakeholder- und Benutzersitzungen aufzuzeichnen und zu interpretieren und die Schlussfolgerungen in die allgemeinen Projektanforderungen einfließen zu lassen. 

KONTINUIERLICHE KOMMUNIKATION 

Abschließend besteht die wichtige Aufgabe darin, den Beteiligten mitzuteilen, was Sie mit ihrem Feedback gemacht haben und warum.  Dies ist der Schlüssel, um sie für das Projekt zu gewinnen. 

Sie können es nicht immer allen Projektbeteiligten recht machen, also begründen Sie Ihre Entscheidungen, wenn Sie können, mit Daten.  Die Stakeholder und insbesondere die Hauptnutzer haben es in der Hand, ob der neue Prozess Erfolg hat oder nicht. Wenn es um die Implementierung geht, brauchen Sie ihre Unterstützung, um ihre Teams und Kollegen zu ermutigen, das neue System zu nutzen. Auch wenn es ihnen vielleicht nicht gefällt, was sie hören, werden sie es zu schätzen wissen, dass Sie auf sie zugehen. 

Letztendlich müssen Sie die Stakeholder auch im weiteren Verlauf des Projekts zur Validierung heranziehen, vor allem um sicherzustellen, dass das gelieferte System nicht von den vereinbarten Zielen abweicht, und um zu prüfen, ob die ursprünglichen Anforderungen noch gültig sind, da sie sich im Laufe der Zeit ändern können. Auch dies ist ein Vorteil eines Scope Dokuments. Viele Anwendungen wurden in Betrieb genommen, und die Benutzer sagten: „Toll, aber das ist nicht das, was wir jetzt brauchen!“ 

FAKTOREN, DIE FÜR EINE EFFEKTIVE BETEILIGUNG DER STAKEHOLDER ZU BEACHTEN SIND 

  • Machen Sie deutlich, was mit dem Projekt erreicht werden soll 
  • Identifizieren Sie die Projektbeteiligten – insbesondere deren Rollen und Verantwortlichkeiten 
  • Verwenden Sie relevante Erfassungsmethoden – halten Sie sie konsistent und unvoreingenommen 
  • Lassen Sie das Feedback in die Lösungsanforderungen einfließen – achten Sie auf Ausgewogenheit und behalten Sie die Projektziele im Blick 
  • Halten Sie die Beteiligten über den Fortschritt auf dem Laufenden und seien Sie bereit, das Projekt anzupassen, wenn es die vereinbarten Ziele nicht erreicht 
  • Überprüfen Sie die Projektziele immer wieder anhand der geänderten Anforderungen der Interessengruppen. 

Der dritte und letzte Beitrag in dieser Reihe befasst sich mit dem Change Management. Wenn  

Wenn Sie bereit sind, Ihr Legal Tech Projekt zu starten, fordern Sie eine Produktdemo für unsere Legal Operations-Lösungen an, die genau auf Ihre Anforderungen zugeschnitten ist. 

A Quick Survey and Good Cause: Your Input Needed on Contract Lifecycle Management in Legal

Posted on July 26, 2018 by - Company News and Events, Contract Lifecycle Management

Onit would like to invite you to participate in Hyperion Research’s 2018 survey on the use and adoption of Contract Lifecycle Management in Legal. This survey is focused on how technology professionals and attorneys are using and getting the most out of their Contract Management technologies and what capabilities they value and prioritize most. The survey will only take about 4-6 minutes to complete.

The excitement doesn’t end there! Hyperion also has a very worthwhile incentive for completing their survey:

“Hyperion proudly presents our Donations for Data program. We honor your investment of time with a deeper investment in our communities. Hyperion proudly presents our Donations for Data program. For every survey completion we receive, Hyperion will donate $10 to accredited charities benefiting youth and education.”

We hope you’ll take the time to complete this meaningful survey, and contribute to a great cause at the same time.

Click here to begin the survey.

Five Reasons to Use an Elite Business Process Platform

Posted on July 25, 2018 by - Business Process Management

Business process automation software should never be an unchangeable, stagnant drain on your resources. It should have the capability to be augmented or modified at some point if it’s going to help your departments meet their business goals. Software also needs to fit the collaborative way that business is now done. There have been a lot of changes in the world of business process automation in recent years and it’s not always easy to keep up with what’s the latest and greatest.

What’s needed is an innovative platform that makes it easy to create, modify and deploy new process solutions with robust workflow, transaction management and reporting capabilities. To cover the many reasons to invest in such a tool would consume a lot of time, so we’ve narrowed the field down to five:

  1. Cost savings – Solve business problems without the need for costly support, training or IT infrastructure. Software as a service (SaaS) is the way to go, freeing up your team members to do their “real work.”
  2. Solutions are easy to create – Some workflow solutions can be created in less than 30 minutes.
  3. Transparency – Business teams have real-time visibility in processes, such as sales quote approvals, NDA requests, or contract negotiations.
  4. Implementation times are fast – Most implementations take place in weeks; not months. ROI can be seen much sooner than with traditional process automation projects.
  5. Highly human-centric – Each solution has four simple but crucial built-in capabilities:
    – A simple intake form
    – A shared workspace
    – Configured and ad hoc workflow
    – Dashboards

Business process automation platforms have been around for years, but the best have only recently emerged. It can be an overwhelming task trying to decide which one is just right for your business. When it comes to state-of-the-art solution development, you must have the workflow, process and collaboration platform that is the best fit for the way your teams work.