EROS CASE STUDY : HM TREASURY : ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT MANAGEMENT STRATEGY 

by Simon Judge, Mike Flynn, Richard Blake, Ian Macfarlane

1. Introduction and Background
   
The Treasury wished to understand what opportunities existed to make improvements within its internal operations to enhance its management of information. To facilitate this aim it commissioned a scoping study to address the following issues:-
	
	a) To reduce the financial cost of transferring and storing information within 	     the Treasury
	b) To increase the speed and accuracy with which staff throughout the 	  	    Treasury can receive new or retrieved stored information
	c) To increase the efficiency with which the Treasury can access information 	    available outside the department
	d) To determine what could be done now and quickly
	     - Ministerial correspondence
	     - Parliamentary questions
	     - Filing
	e) To identify opportunities for business process re-engineering

This study identified a need to reform the main information storage and retrieval process as the department’s vision was that information would be stored electronically and that paper versions would be exceptional. This was given a further focus by the belief that both internal and external communications would be received and generated in an electronic format with E-mail being the predominant means of communication. Underpinning this vision was an assumption that within two years 100% of communications within Treasury would be electronic and that within two to five years 90% of information exchanges between Treasury and other government departments would be electronic as would 75% of the links with the financial industry and other public databases. Consequently an electronic document management system was seen as the logical solution. This would have to be integrated with the existing networked OASIS desktop and provide an electronic alternative to the paper filing system.

2. Aims of the System

It was determined that the existing approach to the management of records     including the concept and structure of the paper file would be retained. However, the electronic filing system would provide an optional system for the OASIS desktop. It was agreed that the new electronic filing system would mirror the paper filing system, enabling users to create electronic files, and to show links to any paper documents associated with those files. The overall objective would be department wide storage and access to information; high level of security; intelligible file and folder names for the storage of electronic objects; and powerful search facilities which would search on the textual contents of a document, not just certain attributes.
Although the amount of paper received from external sources will reduce paper documentation and paper files will remain for some time. Nevertheless scanners would be required for the conversion of some of this paper to image, ASCII or word processed text which could then be scanned and indexed into the Document Manager  or the network as required.  

3. Major Requirements

There were three major requirements identified  by the scoping study. these were:-
	
	a) A new process for handing ministerial correspondence. Ministerial post once read by the minister should be scanned and registered by the Private Office on a database. Thenceforward the letter would be sent by the network to both the relevant Treasury team head and team and, if 	appropriate, transmitted to the Revenue Central Unit and/or the 	Customs Parliamentary Unit as well. The affected teams and units would 	research the matter and draft replies which would either be mailed 	through the network to the Team Head or, in the case of the units direct 	to the 	Private Office for approval. After approval or amendment a paper 	document would be printed for the minister’s signature and despatch. 

	b) A new process for handling Parliamentary Questions (PQs). Here it 	was envisaged that the Parliamentary Unit would send an electronic copy 	to the relevant division and they in turn would send an electronic reply. 	Following ministerial approval copies would despatched  to Hansard and 	the press gallery and the electronic copy would also be passed to 	Hansards.

		c) An electronic filing system which would ensure documents entered the
		the registration system upon creation and allow for active management 	of the files including access and version control. Documents would have 	to be managed transparently throughout the network, while integrity, 	security and a well-structured document production cycle was 	maintained.
   
4. System Structure / Architecture

The selected document management system had to work with the OASIS desktop which is a networked software package available to all users and provides a platform for word processing spreadsheets and other office based systems. SAROS Document Manager was selected to undertake this role due to its open architecture and ability to use window based applications. The Document Manager is itself rooted in the client server software SAROS Mezzanine and it uses this to manage the life-cycle of documents and their components. Its functions include network-wide searching, version control, access control, system backup and a wide range of library facilities. 
The department currently relies on a system of locally based functionally controlled file servers dedicated to functional desktops which are themselves linked to a departmental wide network. SAROS Document Manager is a centrally based server linked to the desktop network to provide an administrative service for the whole department. The files are accessed locally but they must be routed via the document manager if they are to be saved on the system.
Each document has a definable limit to the number of versions kept on-line. When that limit is exceeded designated versions are automatically archived to a pre-determined location. If access to an archived version is required a reclaim process can retrieve it from the designated archive area.
Its open architecture and modular approach allows for expansion and development and new hardware, such as additional servers. and new software can be incorporated on the system with no effect on existing users   

5. Controls, Rules and Standards
 
An administrative group has been set up for each directorate which will include super users. Within each directorate there are a number of super users who will be responsible for creating and maintaining the hierarchical folder structure. Their role is analogous to that of filing clerks employed in the paper registry system. This is to enable them to set up and maintain the folder structure. A team’s super user will be responsible for creating any sub-team, subject and file folders. Only the super user is authorised to do this 	work and no one else may undertake this work. The system is designed with 	folder defaults so that any corporate folder, will be visible and accessible to any user. However, super users will be able to overwrite the access permissions below directorate folder level although they will not own or have access to the contents of personal folders. By default, personal folders and the folders below them will only be visible to the person concerned and to the system administrator.

6. Information / Records Structure and Rules / Definitions
    
The SAROS Document Management System was chosen to provide the electronic filing facility. SAROS is organised into libraries and includes the facilities to enable users to create hierarchical folder structures within the libraries to help them manage their documents. Users were presented with three possible choices of folder structure.

These were:-

	a)Hierarchical folder structure that exactly mirrors the current paper based 	   	  filing system of teams and sub teams, each with their own alpha (subject 	 	  classification) list, and within each subject a series of individual folders 		  exactly  corresponding to the current files 
	b) A directorate wide structure by merging the current alpha lists
	c) A “big bucket” approach using a very limited subject set and relying on the 	    search facilities available with SAROS   

Within the main library the Information System Team set up an initial hierarchical folder structure. This followed the organisational structure of Directorates and Teams. A folder was set up for each Directorate and within each of these a Directorate Management folder and Team folders. Directorate folders are controlled centrally. Users only have viewer access to these folders and are not to be able to add documents or folders to them. Folders in this layer only contain other folders. They do not contain documents.

The layers below the Directorate folders can be of variable thickness. Whether a Directorate retains its team folders for example, depends on the structure it has chosen to work with but it is likely to be one of the following:

		team then subject then file;	

		team then sub-team then subject then file;

		subject then file;

		subject and smart folders.

A file folder corresponds to the existing paper folder; subjects are taken from an existing or revised alpha list, and teams and sub-teams have only been included if a Directorate’s current filing system is defined in this way, and they wish to continue this practice.
Individual users are free to add documents and folders to folders at the lowest level of their Directorate or Team structure
In addition some teams may require a Team Management folder, and each user may also have a personal folder. All teams have been given a parent folder to hold all the personal folders for the whole team. Individual team members will be free to put whatever they like into their personal folder on the understanding that official papers are stored in the team’s files within the hierarchical folder structure.
Most users have chosen the first option for their hierarchical folder structure as it has the advantage of familiarity and the link to the paper based files is intuitive and easy to understand. The disadvantages are that the user has a much bigger folder population to choose from as a home for their documents, taking longer and making errors more likely. A further problem is that the user will also be limited in the use of “smart” folders as initially it will only be possible to search on the contents of the “parent” folder. This however should be rectified as the folder search facility becomes available.
Users choosing the second and third options (see (b) and (c) above) would avoid the disadvantages of the hierarchical system but there would be a need to review “alpha” lists and current filing practices in order to develop a directorate structure, or a limited subject set, which would involve a great deal of work. Consequently the recommended option was the hierarchical system but directorates were permitted to choose. However, it was emphasised that directorate and teams should not simply replicate the existing paper system as the transition to an electronic filing system presents users with an opportunity to rationalise their paper structure and then align the electronic structure with the revised architecture of the paper system.

October 1996