When I hear the term "paperless office" I have to control my laughter. Why? Because there is no such thing as a paperless office. And, unfortunately, it's not likely to become a reality anytime soon.
Championing the paperless office isn't merely a case of adopting the latest technology simply for its own sake. There are sound economic and environmental reasons. Paper is expensive. Cut down on paper use and you cut costs. The less paper that is used, the fewer the trees that have to be killed.
It's not that the technology hasn't kept up with the vision. Technologies touted as the digital version of paper include HTML, e-mail, Windows Help, Adobe Acrobat and its imitators. The list goes on. Some companies use word processor formats -- opened with specialized viewers -- and even arcane typesetting languages like TeX. They're simple to use and effectively present information. The software used to create and view output is widely available and isn't prohibitively expensive. But instead of decreasing the amount of paper we use, these technologies have actually increased the volume of paper being spit out by printers.
If you don't believe me, walk by a printer at the office and take a good look around. Chances are you'll see literally dozens of sheets of paper lying either on the printer or in its vicinity. Everything from memos and spreadsheets to Web pages that have been spat out in the last few hours or the last day.
By far, the worst culprit has to be e-mail. Everywhere I've worked (either as a full-time employee or on contract), the document you see most coming out of the printer is e-mail. You'd think that employees delete the messages they've printed. They don't. Most of the time they never refer to either the digital version or the hard copy.
The next greatest waste of paper is the printing of draft documents at every stage of production. This may have been necessary in the days before WYSIWYG but now it's just a waste of paper. While WYSIWYG is actually "what you see is (sort of) what you get," the on-screen view gives a more than adequate impression of what a document looks like. Even the revision process can be automated. The big name word processors like Word and Word Pro allow files to be marked up or edited by anyone with access to it. The revisions are automatically tracked and can be viewed without pressing the Print button. But people still press that button anyway.
No matter what people might say, the problem doesn't lie with the technology used to create files. Rather, the reason the paperless office doesn't exist rests with end users and their hardware.
On the human side, there are a number of reasons for the bumpy transition. The chief among these is that most people are tactile. They like to have something in their hands. The heft of paper is comforting to them. In fact, I've been told that a document isn't "real" otherwise. On top of that you can't markup what's on-screen. Few digital paper applications allow you to, for example, highlight trenchant points in a memo or in a certain chapter of a manual.
Regardless of a company's boasts of staying on the cutting edge, employees generally lack knowledge of what these technologies can do and of how to use them properly. This is especially true when working with the Internet and Intranets. Instead of bookmarking Web pages, or downloading them for later viewing, employees print them. Often they don't use duplex if it's available. Why print? The main reason I've been given is so that the documents are "close at hand." This usually means they've been put into a folder then shoved into a drawer. I find it faster and easier to fire up a Web browser or the Envoy Viewer to view at a document than to rummage through my desk to find it.
What's the root of this ignorance? Lack of proper training. When I mention bookmarking internal Web pages to people, they seem surprised. They thought that it could only be done on the WWW. If someone sat down with employees for a couple of hours and gave them a crash course on how to use digital paper, I believe paper usage would dramatically decline.
On top of that, there's the computer monitor. It's not
exactly the best way to look at anything, regardless of the
screen's resolution. As one who sits before a computer screen
for five hours or more a day, I can tell you how
tired your eyes become staring at the monitor for extended
periods. For many, shifting their eyes away from the screen
to a sheaf of paper is an incredible relief.
It's also the material being read. Most of what's circulated internally (either on an Intranet or in a digital format) is often written by people who simply can't write. Their grammar and syntax is atrocious, and they more often than not use twice as many words as needed. Sure, an inter-departmental memo doesn't have to be a literary masterpiece but it should be concise and easy to read. Users shouldn't have to wade dense prose to find what they're looking for, nor should they have to read a document two or three times before they begin to understand it.
With the growing popularity of Intranets, this sort of trend is worsening. Pages posted on the Intranets I've seen alternate between being very text heavy and being "flashy": with a lot of graphics, Java applets and "cool" effects, but with very little substance. No one seems willing or able to strike a balance. It would take time to do this, but in the end it would be worth it.
Having said all that, I must admit I've run into a few firms -- mostly smaller, high tech ones -- that have realized the potential of the paperless office. Using their Intranets and a combination of software (for example TeX, Postscript, FrameMaker, Microsoft Word, Common Ground), these companies have cut their paper usage dramatically. Part of this stems from the technology. Part comes from the fact that management instituted stiff penalties for unnecessary paper use. But, as I mentioned, these are usually smaller companies. This attitude, and the resolve backing it up, hasn't filtered into larger firms.
To make the paperless office a reality, firms of all sizes have to stop paying lip service to "keeping up with the latest technology" and actually do something about it. It takes more than purchasing the fastest computers and latest software. More even than investing the time and money to train their employees. These are important components in the equation, but another seemingly intangible investment must be made. Electronic documents must be written and organized so that it's readable and easy to navigate. Until this happens, the paperless office will continue to be a myth.