Cooper Mann Consulting

June 13, 2013June 17, 2013

Preparing for Disasters of the Legal Kind

As businesses begin to realize the benefits of cloud computing and business data mobility, they may be overlooking one of the most important issues any enterprise can face: information management in the event of litigation. While the IT department probably has a disaster recovery plan for handling various computer system failures, is there also a plan for managing system data and electronic information in the event of a “legal disaster”? In the spotlight is e-discovery, which is the requirement of the business to respond to legal requests for electronically stored information, and the issues CIOs and business owners should be paying attention to as computing solutions and technology models continue to change at a rapid pace.

The popularity of BYOD (Bring Your Own Device), data sync solutions, and online collaboration tools has created an environment where business data may exist in various states (meaning as in conditions or status, not as in State, like California) and on a variety of devices and systems, some of which may not be in the direct control of internal IT. Regardless of where or how the information was delivered to these devices and systems, CIOs and business owners should recognize that the information on those devices is included in discovery requests, and should be prepared with a plan for dealing with the response.

This “e-discovery plan” is the most important thing, and it means not only working through the various aspects of managing the information, but also providing consideration to keeping the plan updated. As technology changes, and as user behavior changes along with it, businesses must adjust their IT management approaches in kind. Consider that a user couldn’t store business data on their phone until the phone was able to handle that function. Now that smartphones are the norm and tablet computers are gaining in popularity, business data is roaming on personal and business devices. These advancements may introduce productivity and process gains which provide an advantage to businesses, but they also introduce potential risk and certain complexity when it comes to e-discovery.

Litigation is always expensive, but sanctions for slow response or other costs can be avoided if the plan helps the business respond in a timely manner. For this reason, the plan should include an identification of all sources for information (every location where business information and data is stored), as well as the steps to be taken to preserve this data in the current state. If the business has systems which regularly purge information (like accounting systems which purge prior period details, email systems which automatically purge old emails, or backup systems which delete old backup files as new ones are made), all of these activities must be halted. If the company doesn’t have access to control the various devices and systems to prevent these activities (or doesn’t know that they are happening), significant risk is introduced. In the case of a legal “hold”, all data and metadata and the audit controls and files must be preserved.

The final steps in the plan are the steps to be taken after the litigation is over. This is often times a forgotten part of the plan, which is the final destruction of the information gathered for discovery. Not that the original data must be destroyed (consider ALL dependencies), but the “database” of collected information related to the litigation probably should be. With this data pooled in a single place, it becomes a potentially valuable target for a data breach. At minimum, the collected information could too-easily be pulled into an entirely new legal case.

IT managers, CIOs and business owners must be realistic about the information their enterprises generate and store, including being realistic about the risk potential that duplicated and mobile data represents. It is not that the enterprise should be afraid of allowing mobility and providing remote access solutions, but it is essential that the enterprise control the use of these solutions and how they use or interact with business data. Without a strictly enforced policy of usage and control for all devices, services and solutions “touching” business data, any legal disaster planning falls short.

Joanie Mann Bunny Feet Make Sense?

Read More:

June 12, 2013

e-Discovery in the Cloud: Benefits versus Risks

After many years of working with business professionals in “enabling” their organizations to make better use of technology, I must say that it is a bit frustrating trying to get folks to understand that this new and wonderful cloud computing model (or Internet-based computing, SaaS, or whatever-you-want-to-call-it computing) is still just technology. It uses computers and disk drives, it runs software, it takes electricity, and it was developed by human beings. It can break. It’s not magical and perfect and you can’t get the good stuff for free. Swim at your own risk. So, assess the risks, and measure the benefits against the risks and costs. For many, the benefits outweigh the risks, as cloud computing approaches can deliver advanced capabilities at cost levels not previously available to most businesses.

No industry is immune to the security and access considerations surrounding a cloud computing model. Particular those lawyers involved in e-discovery (all of them) have recognizing the potential benefits – and tradeoffs – of the model. This reality was clearly revealed at the ILTA (International Legal Technology Association) 2010 event in Las Vegas. While the discussions at the conference were oriented specifically towards the legal profession, the IT-related discussions are totally relevant to every business. Accounting and finance professionals should pay close attention to this type of conversation, as it relates very directly to accounting’s approach to information technology and the application of IT in the business or professional practice.

In a recap of the event entitled ILTA 2010 in Las Vegas: Strategic Unity, Defensibility, and the Cloud, author Chris Dale discussed that professionals in both public and corporate service must work with the IT departments towards a common goal. “IT is no longer just a service department providing an infrastructure, applications, training, and troubleshooting.” While these elements still remain as critical aspects of IT, the role has grown to also incorporate considerations for collaboration (collaborative information management), mobility, and social media.

Recounting one session attended, called Defensible Ediscovery Processes, the author related the variety of definitions provided to the general term” defensible”, which were pretty amusing. These definitions ranged from “protected against attack“, to “less lousy practices“ or “practices which suck the least” (my personal favorite), and finally, “what you can get away with without being found guilty of spoliation“. From these definitions then came qualifiers, such as “reasonableness” and “faith”.

Why would defensible processes be important, and how does this relate to IT or cloud computing? An example of the element of “faith” came up in this context: ” how can [lawyers] have faith that the technology is delivering the right answers?” A panelist gave the sample of “an email retrieved from (or possibly not retrieved from [love those lawyers]) a system, with 26.5 pages missing. How can you be sure that the systems which you are using will not do that to you?” These are valid questions in any IT environment, and are no less important when considering a cloud-based technology model. The trade-offs are related to perfection in functionality and performance of the solution versus cost, and should be measured in proportion to one another.

The tradeoffs may come in a variety of areas, with collaboration and connectivity being the primary drivers (collaboration) and barriers (connectivity) to the model. Businesses are more than ready to adopt cloud computing strategies based on the belief in improved collaboration, access to information, and improved IT management, but tend to overlook the offsets in the areas of bandwidth availability (and consistency), application functionality (or lack thereof), and level of support available from the provider. In support of this argument, Jerry Justice (IT Director for SS&G – Certified Public Accountants and Advisers) posted in a LinkedIn discussion on the topic that “by design the Internet is ‘reasonably’ connected, but not the same as a well-connected [local] network. the upside is it gives you the ability to connect from great distances, the tradeoff is that you experience variable connectivity.”

“The underlying issues are that there is a paradigm shift to working on the Internet (from working in the office) and then another shift when you add in cloud-based environments (versus local apps). It is possible to be very productive, but .. you have to adapt your approaches“.

The idea “that perfect must be qualified by cost and proportionality” was also discussed in an ILTA session on cloud computing which included panelists from Autonomy iManage, Mayer Brown, and Ernst & Young. “Cloud computing remains a contentious area, with no obvious agreement even as to what the term means, let alone as to its implications” wrote Mr Dale in his recap of the event. While the panelists held differing views, the representative from Mayer Brown held a position similar to Mr Dale, in that it is important to “dissect the objections one at a time, accepting that there is room for more than one view, and testing arguments against the alternatives. Arguments based on pure cost are pretty compelling, and if one method of achieving an objective is very much cheaper than the others, then the burden shifts to those who argue for the more expensive route.”

Discussions went on to describe differences between public cloud providers and others, who segregate customer data in “private and identifiable silos”. “The key word here is identifiable“, writes the author, “which connotes a geographical certainty as well as anything else. I sometimes wonder if the imagery associated with cloud computing (invariably a jagged line disappearing into some cumulus) does not leave some people with the idea that their precious data is indeed floating in some inchoate container up in the air.”

“If you neglect to provide in your contract that your data remains in a specified jurisdiction, and if you fail to conduct proper due diligence checks on the provider, then you deserve all you get. Like any risk assessment, it involves weighing cost against other factors; most of these other factors are definable and quantifiable“.

I couldn’t have said it better myself.

Joanie Mann Bunny Feet J

original post March 24, 2011

June 11, 2013November 3, 2017

A Holistic Approach to Cloud IT

holistic: a. Emphasizing the importance of the whole and the interdependence of its parts.

The Internet and cloud computing solutions can help businesses create an environment which allows team members and clients to work together more efficiently; where information can be generated once and used in a variety of ways by different users. With this new capability to share documents and files in real-time, many businesses are finding that they are generating more electronic information today than ever before – and they’re having a hard time keeping these information assets organized. With paper documents being digitized to allow for electronic distribution, OCR, and intelligent connecting to transaction data – lots of stored data is being produced and stored in a variety of places.

There are many technology models available, so there are a lot of options for businesses today – options which address the fundamental requirements to convert, store, secure, and distribute the various data types within the enterprise. When a business elects to use a variety of cloud solutions or providers to address a number of business problems, how does that enterprise wrap its arms around the content which represents, in all actuality, the sum of business intelligence in the enterprise? Keeping tabs on the business data is critical, but tracking all the data when it is stored with a variety of providers may be very difficult.

Example: If your business uses an online CRM such as Salesforce.com, runs QuickBooks on your local PC, and uses Gmail for email service… exactly where does your business data live? With Salesforce? On your local PC? At Google? In all 3 places?

Containment of distributed data isn’t the only issue facing businesses today. Longevity and long-term access to data is a concern, as well. Solutions and providers that exist today may not exist tomorrow. If you have data invested in a solution with a short life span (and you probably won’t know this is the case until it’s too late), you may orphan your data and not be able to access it later. And, if you can get your data from the provider, is it in a useful form or did you lose functionality when you lost the solution?

Example: Intuit once introduced a paperclip (attached documents service) in QuickBooks, and offered the attached document feature at no charge. The “free” service from Intuit encouraged a lot of users to migrate from other QuickBooks-connected document management solutions. Then… Intuit announced that the attached documents service would no longer be free. Users with the service could still get to their documents via a web portal, but not from within QuickBooks, and certainly not as attachments to transactions or other records. Then the attached documents feature was once-again changed, allowing only storage to local PCs rather than on Intuit’s servers. Then, it went away entirely.

Another issue facing businesses operating in the cloud is one of vendor lock-in (or lock-out), and being able to address the total business requirement. Point solutions and vendor-specific solutions may address certain business problems, but generally aren’t able to handle all of the needs of a given business. If your online solution doesn’t address the needs of the entire business, you risk increasing production costs and reducing productivity through duplication of data entry and other activities.

Example: An accounting firm with an insurance division uses Thomson Reuters Virtual Office service, which delivers certain accounting applications along with Microsoft Office on a remote desktop type of connection. Unfortunately for the firm, the users operating in the insurance division use applications that aren’t supported or available via the Virtual Office solution. So, certain users have completely disconnected services – a remote desktop serving up their Office apps, and a separate browser-based solution – neither of which integrate or work together. The complexity and confusion caused by this situation has done little more than increase the burden of duplicate data entry, recreation of documents, and constant download-save-upload activities.

In each of these cases, a “holistic” approach to cloud IT services might have produced better results than by looking at each application or functional “solution” individually.

As an example, consider that a business with in-office and mobile employees needs to use accounting, office productivity, contact management, documents storage, and several browser-based solutions in order to provide the functionality and operational support necessary. While many of these solutions are individually available online, the business opts to work with a single outsourced IT provider to create their own “private cloud” environment.

The solution includes remote/virtual desktops, hosted accounting applications, hosted Office applications, hosted browser (to allow browser and Internet-based apps to integrate with Office and other apps on the remote desktop), hosted CRM, and hosted document management… all applications that the business selects and might even have been using for years are included.

All applications are delivered on the remote desktop environment, providing users with the ability to open documents instantly, save and share files seamlessly, and participate in a central company-wide document store.

All applications are licensed to the business, so they have the flexibility of returning to local IT operations simply by implementing their own software in their own network and taking the data off the host.

Because all of the business data resides on this single hosting platform, the business is able to not only keep control of all information assets, but is also able to back up and protect (preserve) that data in its entirety.

Now doesn’t that make sense?

Learn more…

June 10, 2013

Are the security requirements for accounting and finance professionals using cloud services any less stringent than those governing lawyers?

As accounting and finance professionals look to the cloud and Internet technologies to address collaboration, mobility, and improvements in service delivery, they should also be looking at ways to ensure the protection and security of client financial information. Professional services organizations of all types are embracing cloud products and services, sometimes without properly considering how it might impact information security and business risk. The security requirements for accounting and finance professionals using cloud services are no less stringent than those governing lawyers.

In her article “NC Bar Council issues final opinion on the cloud “, author Nicole Black points out some of the essential considerations for using cloud computing services in a professional legal practice. Accounting and finance professionals should recognize this guidance as being applicable to their businesses, too.

The main question stems from the ethical issues faced by “lawyers who intend to store confidential client information on servers owned and operated by third parties”. An opinion issued by the North Carolina State Bar Council addressed two primary questions in this area:

1. Is it OK for a law firm to use Software as a Service or cloud computing products?

2. Are there any special vendor assessments or other measures which should be taken by lawyers who wish to minimize the security risks of implementing this type of solution?

Read the entire article by Nicole here (PDF format)

Nicole Black is a Rochester, New York attorney and the Vice President of Business Development and Community Relations at MyCase, a powerful and intuitive cloud-based law practice management platform. She is also a GigaOM Pro Analyst and is the author of the ABA book Cloud Computing for Lawyers, co-authors the ABA book Social Media for Lawyers: the Next Frontier, and co-authors Criminal Law in New York, a West-Thomson treatise. She is the founder of lawtechTalk.com and speaks regularly at conferences regarding the intersection of law and technology. She publishes four legal blogs and can be reached at nblack@nicoleblackesq.com.

Joanie Mann Bunny Feet J

original post April 5, 2012

June 5, 2013April 28, 2017

Sustainability and the Humanization of Work

Few problems in business are truly solved simply by throwing more money and resources at them. Certainly, having the people, tools and supplies to get the work done well is a business requirement, and many organizations take a “building out” approach to addressing growing workloads and customer demand. On the other hand, there are business owners who recognize that things can always be accomplished better and more efficiently, and that improvements in these areas can make the difference between ending up with an overburdened organization with more mass than agility, or a lean organization with the ability to sustain itself while continuously adjusting to meet changing internal and external challenges.

It is said that the only constant is change, and businesses must find a way to effectively and cost-efficiently meet changing demands and conditions in order to survive. What frustrates many business owners is that change is generally disruptive to the business, representing a significant challenge when it comes to the re-development of internal processes and procedures. At issue is the understanding that proven, structured and repeatable processes help to improve efficiency, yet changing conditions often require changes to these processes. In many cases, businesses find that the requirement to structure and document activities is work that must be re-done in the event of broad changes. Too often, the work falls by the wayside because the minute it is completed, some change comes along and renders it obsolete. It is somewhat like the child who questions making their bed each day, as they’re just going to sleep in it again and make it messy.

There may be a solution, and a lesson to be learned, in the “kaizen” approach to change and improvement. Wikipedia’s entry on Kaizen identifies the meaning of the Japanese-Kanji word as simply “good change”. Similar to the English word “improvement”, kaizen does not refer specifically to any single or ongoing change. Rather, it has come to describe an approach to business which recognizes the potential for improvement – improvement in work product, work conditions, worker satisfaction, and worker performance – at all levels throughout the enterprise. Further, kaizen does not describe change as being broad-ranging or particularly intrusive. Beneficial (good) change may come at any level and may be identified by almost any source.

Kaizen is a daily process, the purpose of which goes beyond simple productivity improvement. It is also a process that, when done correctly, humanizes the workplace, eliminates overly hard work (“muri”), and teaches people how to perform experiments on their work using the scientific method and how to learn to spot and eliminate waste in business processes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaizen

The ultimate business goals are, of course, improved productivity, product quality and profitability. A “Kaizen” approach to business recognizes that these goals are often met through gaining the participation of the entire organization. Whether approached as individual effort, small or large group, or via suggestion system, the purpose is to nurture the company’s human resource and help focus it towards making improvements in work environment and activities which lead to improved productivity. After all, the most valuable asset a business has is its people. It is logical to apply this individual and collective intelligence and source of business knowledge towards making the company better – and a better place to work.

Make sense?

June 3, 2013

Client Solutions, not just Professional Services

Accounting Professionals serving a small business client base are struggling to find ways to demonstrate the value of the services they provide, yet many firms remain focused exclusively on their own processes and improving profitability therein rather than looking “outside the box” to see how they might involve the client in the discovery. The obvious element which these firms are not addressing is the client user, and how a direct participation by the client becomes the foundation for internal process improvement. After all, a lot of what accounting professionals are battling against is perceived value. If the client were to be a more direct participant, the value of the work and the tools which support getting it done could provide a more tangible or visible aspect and increase the overall value perception of the client.

It is easy to say “get the client more involved”, but actually doing it can be the real challenge. Professionals are recognizing this reality as they attempt to engage client users in online portals for document exchange and by providing application functionality which is supportive of the accountants’ processes. While some professional firms are experiencing success with this approach, many other firms are not. There are likely a variety of reasons why some firms have more success than others in getting clients to work with their online tools, but I believe there are two key elements which impact success: accountant-centric focus, and provider lock-in. Whether these elements work to the firms’ advantage or not depends solely upon the specifics of the service model and client market being served.

Accountant-centric focus

Most accounting professionals recognize that paperless approaches to working with client information and documents makes a lot more sense than working with the actual paper. Particularly with the innovations in image capture, OCR and zero-entry solutions, it is logical to try to get as much of the required information transformed into useful digital data as possible. Data entry time is reduced, accuracy is improved, and the resultant information is better and more useful and may be processed more efficiently… for the accounting professional. For the client, on the other hand, it’s just another way to get information to the accountant (who is always wanting more information). The value of the deliverable – the reconciled bank account, financial report, tax return or whatever – isn’t increased. The solution often offered to the client is a solution intended to solve not the client problems, but the accountant’s. For the client, it is difficult to see this as a “solution” to any evident problem they face.

Provider lock-in

Business software customers are often commenting about how the solutions they use don’t allow easy transition to alternative products, or add-ons are only available from developer-prescribed sources. Vendor lock-in is a consideration and may be a barrier to doing business, because business owners want to know that they have the ability to change as business requirements change… whether it means changing software and systems, or whether it means changing professional service providers. As more professional service providers attempt to engage their clients in technology-based approaches to doing business, clients are recognizing that these approaches may come with “strings attached”, limiting their future choices. While it is important for the professional services firm to protect its work product, it is also important to consider the client’s position. Part of every business relationship is trust, and that trust should not be one-sided. Just as the professional trusts that the client will work with them in a legitimate manner, so does the client trust that their professional will not hold their information hostage if they elect to make a change or engage with other providers in the future. Additionally, does the system provided by the accounting firm allow the client to collaborate with their own team members or other service providers, or does it address only the interactions between the accounting pro and the client? This also represents a barrier to participation, as any given client business likely interacts with a variety of providers – many of whom are also asking that owner to implement solutions which improve their ability to do a form of e-business together.

As accounting service providers look to technology to facilitate closer and more efficient working arrangements with clients, they would do well to also consider how that technology is positioned to benefit the client as well as the professional practice. Delivering a solution which provides clients with the capability to control information access, which allows collaboration with their various service providers, and which facilitates a lean process approach for all involved could be the right answer to the problem. Perhaps this becomes the most important factor – client enablement – and focusing on solutions which address the clients’ information management and processing requirements as well as those of the firm.

Preparing for Disasters of the Legal Kind

Share this:

e-Discovery in the Cloud: Benefits versus Risks

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Sustainability and the Humanization of Work

Share this:

Client Solutions, not just Professional Services

Make Sense?

Share this: