Some years ago, the theme for the Business Forms Management Association's Annual Symposium was Technology Transforms Tradition. Yet how often have we found ourselves overcome and bound by technology and tradition.
From the time when Gutenberg printed the first form to the present, form design has more often than not been driven by the technology of the day. Technology, having set the standard, drives the tradition. So when the technological constraints of letterpress printing made it difficult to get ruled lines to join at the corners of boxes, it became tradition to leave off the vertical lines at the ends. The technology has changed, but for many form designers the tradition of open-ended boxes remains. It seems that it doesn't matter if this makes the form more difficult to use—tradition dominates. When the technological constraints of 80 column punched card computing made it imperative to use character separators, it became tradition to use little boxes and combs. The technology has changed, but the tradition of comb delimiters remains and even the developers of forms software often make an issue of their ability to easily produce "combs".
If we're not careful, the burdens of the past will be on us again and we'll have our electronic forms hamstrung by the developers of technology.
In 1969, trainees at the Bank of New South Wales (now Westpac Banking Corporation, one of the world's largest retail banking organisations) were being told that they had better prepare for change. By the mid 1970's they would have a "paperless office". This was an often-repeated prophecy in those not-so-distant times. How frequently did we attend lectures and read articles by "experts" that told us how technology would take over most routine business tasks. We were even told that we needed to be ready for times of leisure that by the 1980's technology would have advanced so far and taken over so much of our routine work that we would only be working 3 or 4 days a week.
But by the mid 1970's I was predicting that the "paperless office" wouldn't happen. And it didn't! These predictions weren't based on any special revelation from "on high". I just knew the way people worked—I knew that the "experts" didn't understand the users. I wasn't the only one; many other writers were talking about the same thing.
If computer systems are to be truly effective with people wanting to use them to replace paper, analysts must design them for people first, and this hasn't happened. Computer systems have reduced paper in some areas, and in a few cases may have even improved productivity, but here we are, in the 21st Century, and we still don't have even a semblance of a "paperless office".
Hardware has been a significant problem and, to some extent, still is. Monitors are still often difficult to read and generally far too small for effective business use. Computers— even portable varieties—are far heavier than paper and nowhere near as easy to manage, and the common computer interface is often difficult to read and use.
Another problem has been the poor quality of networking technology, especially the inadequacy of standard copper telephone lines for data transmission. There have been improvements in this area in some countries, but worldwide, there is still a long way to go.
The "paperless office" predictions of the 1960’s were a grand idea but, at that stage, technically not feasible. Significant changes have now taken place. Electronic forms software—although somewhat crude at times—now has acceptable functionality, prices of powerful computers are dropping, portable hand-held computers are now available that will recognise handwriting and transmit data via digital phone to remote users and databases, and more and more workers are computer literate. No doubt we'll have even better operating systems and user interfaces in the years ahead.
There is still a gross lack of understanding of the issues and with the Internet fast gaining ground, the desire for this latest fad is replacing common sense in many organisations. I find that many of our clients think of electronic forms solely in terms of the very simple forms that are so commonly used on the Internet for ordering goods. These certainly are electronic forms, but they are a long way from the truly sophisticated, productivity improving forms that can be produced.
A few years ago I went to a demonstration of what was supposed to be electronic forms software. When the demo was over, I asked the company's president for a definition of an ‘electronic form’. His reply left me dumbfounded. He said that "an electronic form is a form that can be printed on a laser printer". By extending his definition to forms produced by any computer printing device, we would have been using electronic forms forty years ago. In fact, the earliest specialised electronic forms software, introduced in the mid 1980's, was solely for printing. Some of it was for printing mainframe computer data onto high-speed laser printers. Other software was designed for filling out on screen before printing on a local desktop printer. The software was crude by today's standards, but it was to form the basis for what was to follow.
In 1991, software became available which allowed the user to fill out the form on screen and then send it electronically to someone else (or even another organisation) without the need for paper at all. It seems that the first company to introduce this concept was Shana Corporation in Canada with its Informed software for the Apple Macintosh. A few months later Delrina, another Canadian company, introduced the workflow concept to its popular Perform product with the name changed to FormFlow. Then, around the same time, another Canadian company, Jetform added workflow capability to its very successful high speed electronic forms printing software. These were true "electronic forms". Of course, these systems still allowed for paper printout where this was necessary.
As we move into the second year of the 21st. Century, we find technology changing rapidly. Electronic forms on the Internet (and internally on intranets) are now commonplace. Some web-based technology (especially using Java) is still very crude, but is fast becoming more useable. Non-Java forms software is now much more web-compatible with applications such as Shana's Informed Filler TM having built-in SMTP Mail, HTTP and FTP capability without the need for a web browser.
Using electronic mail includes sending the form to an intermediate party for authorisation. More sophisticated systems include workflow rules that can automatically make routing decisions for the user by examining the rules established for the particular form along with the data entered.
We're now seeing the development of some very powerful document management and workflow software such as Trillium Software's Metastorm e-work and FileNET's eProcess and Panagon products. These applications add enormous potential to electronic forms, making a paper-reduced office a reality.
Some electronic forms software developers are providing software that allows forms routing to be drawn graphically, converting the results automatically to macros attached to the individual form's software.
Of equal potential is the use of pen computing. There are a wide range of devices on the market with the most well known be the Palm. The range of pen-computing devices and software is changing so rapidly that it is impossible to provide an up-to-date list. I suggest reading Pen Computing Magazine to keep up with the latest trends.
While electronic forms do have some disadvantages compared to paper forms, they also provide many advantages for the form user that often far outweigh the problems. Before we consider the traps in using electronic forms, it is worth considering the potential benefits.
Mathematical calculations (including simple addition) are a major source of error in form filling. Electronic forms can be programmed to take care of much of this work, greatly enhancing accuracy.
One of the major problems with form filling is the tendency of people to ignore instructions—or just make assumptions about how to fill in a form, getting it wrong. Electronic forms provide a much easier way for the user to get information. On screen help windows—either called up automatically or on demand—provide the means to give the form filler the correct information right at the point where it is needed, without cluttering up the form when other fields are being filled in.
Self-checking capabilities take the traditional help process a step further, automatically correcting obvious errors, formatting special fields such as dates and temperature, and inhibiting people from entering invalid data
There are four major areas of cost savings—reduced provisioning, storage and distribution; collecting data at the source with elimination of duplicate (and sometimes initial) keying; and error elimination and reduction leading to less need for follow-up and business activities based on real data.
Of course, if you only use electronic forms software to produce print on demand forms you may not be saving anything as laser printing costs may cost more than using preprinted forms. The main advantage here is with low usage forms required by a large number of end users. Rather than supplying forms in hard copy to many people "just in case they need them", the user only needs to print a copy when required. But this doesn't apply to high volume forms. However, if you are making use of the intelligence aspects of electronic forms then there are significant savings—especially if the forms are sent electronically and never printed out. A further processing saving comes from reduced storage, fewer filing cabinets, less floor space and less file folders.
Collecting data at the source is also a big advantage over the use of paper forms. Keying reduction is an important cost saving benefit. It is common for computer data to be entered from previously filled out forms. If these are electronic forms and are completed outside the office, either by your own staff or external staff, then the data can often be submitted to a database direct from the form rather than have it manually keyed. When completed inside the office, the ability to have data sent direct to a database can be a great cost saver.
The third point is error elimination, or at least major error-reduction. There are two areas of savings. As discussed above, electronic forms can reduce re-keying and this can result in less keying errors. Of greater significance is the reduction of errors due to the ability of electronic forms to either detect errors at completion time or to block errors entirely. Fields can have built in edit checks that prevent bad data from being entered. They can also have pop-up warning messages that can prompt a form filler for correct data every time a mistake is made. Some of the most successful I've seen are those that detect errors and don't even allow the forms to be sent to the recipient if there are detectable errors such as invalid data or missing information.
Electronic forms provide a great advantage over paper forms in collecting accurate data. Typical functionality includes automatic calculations; self-checking of data; correct formatting of dates and other special fields; automatic database look-ups; and dynamic choice/pick lists that change depending on the data entered in the form. Give the huge number of errors made on forms this is potentially one of the biggest advantages.
Here is where electronic forms have it all over their paper cousins. Over the 30 plus years that I've been working in the form design business, the most common problem I've come across is people not reading instructions. Many designers place all the instructions on a separate page and that's almost a guarantee that they won't be read by most people. The ideal place for instructions is right where people need the information, but to do that properly for a lot of public-use forms often means more instructions than data space. This is where electronic forms provide a simple solution. It's possible to only have instructions appear when needed instead of cluttering the form. Another way to provide help is to provide prompts when errors are made or even to force people to see help messages.
Another area of savings is with fill-out time. Well designed forms can often have built-in calculations and other automatic filling capabilities that can save a great deal of time. Forms with numeric data are the best candidates for this type of saving with the ability to add totals automatically and to calculate taxes and similar items. Electronic forms can easily look up databases for automatic filling. For example, entering an employee number could automatically fill in information about the person's name and department. Another time saving feature is the use of choice lists which pop up as soon as the form filler tabs into a field. They make form filling both faster and more accurate. Some software allows such lists to automatically enter codes into fields in place of the full selected text.
One of the big advantages of a good electronic forms system is that your forms never need be out of date. (You need to be careful as a lot of software doesn't have forms management capability.) Electronic forms have a big advantage over their paper counterparts. Electronic forms systems should allow you to distribute a new version of a form to all users as soon as it is approved—to provide an instant corporate-wide update.
At the same time they should allow users to continue to use any old version to reference forms that have been completed in the past. (Remember that with electronic forms it is usual for the form graphic to be separate from the data that is entered. That way, when a form is sent from one person to another, only the data needs to be transmitted, thereby saving a great deal in transmission time and substantially reducing network load—I'll have more to say about this later in the paper.) The issue is that it may be necessary to show the format of the form when it was completed. To do that, the correct form graphic must be used.
Digital signatures systems are available with most electronic forms programs. These are far more sophisticated than just scanning a hand-written signature for printing. These devices enable form readers to verify that the data has been entered by an authorised person, or to detect when something has been changed.
Some applications check the data validity only while others check the validity of the basic form graphic or template as well. The latter is an important consideration when desktop "filler" software is being used, as distinct from forms filled out in a web browser, since it ensures the integrity of the total form.
Depending on the software used, security features can prevent someone altering data after it is filled in. It may also be possible to encrypt data during transmission.
This is one of the challenging areas that is set for rapid expansion as web technology improves. In fact, the use of intranets (Internet-like networks used internally in an organisation) overcomes many of the problems experienced by large organisations having a multitude of different networks that don't always talk to one another effectively, or even at all. It has the advantage of common network capabilities, easy access for all users and the potential in some organisations for low cost distribution of forms.
However, our recent experience has shown that the majority of people who want this approach to forms don’t understand the issues. They don’t appreciate the embryonic status of the Internet and, even worse, don’t understand fundamental aspects of how computers function. While the former will be covered in subsequent sections of this paper, it is worth first considering an important fundamental principle.
Computer professionals may find this strange, but many potential Internet users seem to think that just because they can read web pages in a browser such as Netscape Communicator™ or Microsoft Internet Explorer™ and perhaps even fill out simple forms, that these programs can let them do almost anything. I find many people who want all sorts of complex functionality and form processing ‘intelligence’ to be carried out without the software to provide it. They know that if they want spreadsheet functions then they’ll need a program like Microsoft Excel™, or if they want to write a letter they have to use a word processor program but they think that for some reason, forms are different.
If you want intelligent forms to reduce errors and make form fillers more productive, then the software to provide that intelligence MUST reside on the user’s computer while the forms are being filled out. Some people will claim that it can be on a network–and it is true that the necessary software can be elsewhere–but to actually fill out the form, the computer still has to copy the program (or at least relevant parts of it) into memory on the user’s computer.
Web browsers only provide limited intelligence and, even then, it has to be via JavaScript with the relevant scripting code built into the downloadable web page.
There has been a great deal of argument about the use of what has become known as "thin client" versus "thick client". Put simply, "thin client" is the term used to refer to computer usage where the user doesn’t have the application program residing on a local computer. All the computer activity is processed through a web browser. "Thick Client" means that the application program to open a specific computer file runs on each individual user’s local computer. For example, to open a Microsoft Word document it is necessary for the user to have a copy of the Microsoft Word application program either on their local computer, or at least on the space allocated to the user on the network.
People are misled when they decide that forms can be opened in a web browser without special software to provide the ‘intelligence’. The most common assumption is that they can use PDF formatted forms that appear to open in the web browser. They don’t realise that all the browser does is use a plug-in to access Adobe Acrobat Reader or Acrobat software. This software must be installed on the users computer (or accessible space) for PDF forms to be read. Essentially, the plug-in allows the Reader software to open inside the Browser window. The point I’m making is that even Acrobat (PDF) forms are "thick client".
Some people might say, "well, what about Java forms?" The answer is that even Java forms need software to provide the intelligence features and this is included in a collection of small programs called "classes" which must reside on the user’s computer. Usually, these have to be downloaded each time the person opens the form. They may not be there permanently, but they DO have to be there while the form is being used.
I’m not suggesting that the "thin client" approach is wrong. Given the appropriate circumstances, it can be a viable solution to forms distribution. But you need to be sure that it will work for YOUR needs. There are disadvantages to both approaches and these are covered in the following sections. Of course, to be technically correct, there is no such thing as TRUE "thin client" since you still have to install web browser software to read HTML forms. You just can't open forms on a computer without some sort of software to provide the intelligence.
HTML (hypertext markup language) is the most common approach to forms on the web. However, it is severely limited in its capability due to its lack of inherent functionality. To a certain extent this can be overcome by the use of JavaScript that adds intelligence features to HTML forms, but this is only possible if the end-user’s web browser supports JavaScript. At this point in time, that is often no more than a pipe dream as many web users don't have a browser that has JavaScript capability and, even if they do, it isn't always the same version of JavaScript. I recently tried to evaluate some new forms software that was available from the developer's web site but found that it just didn't work on my computer because the version of JavaScript in both my web browsers was incompatible with that used for development of the forms.
HTML and JavaScript forms are suited mainly to short forms such as those used to gather information from web users. They need to be completed while the user is on-line and in a single session. With the use of cgi (Common Gateway Interface) scripts, data can be submitted to databases directly from a user's browser, but these forms do not allow the user to save the form with the data entered. It can be printed with the data and this can be fine for Internet forms, but not being able to save the data can be a serious limitation for internal intranet forms. If the user is to be given the option of saving the data then the web server has to return a copy of the form in plain HTML with the data embedded so that the user can save it.
The main advantages are that files are small, they can be accessed by anyone with a web browser, they can be sent over an e-mail system and they can be easily cross-linked to instructions using HTML hypertext.
The main disadvantage is that forms must be filled out while on-line and this causes problems if the data isn’t readily available. This is a particular problem with long forms, as the person has to start over again if the line drops out. This can happen due to bad phone connections or just timing out because the form filler had to go away to get information. As well as this, connection time can be costly, so there is a tendency for people to rush and make mistakes in order to minimise on-line time. Generally, people filling out long forms in HTML would need to print out a paper copy, collect the data and fill out the form manually, and then go on-line again to complete the HTML form. You might not consider this a problem in your circumstances, but you do need to be aware of the issues. A way around the long form issue is to set up a database at the server end that provides temporary storage for the user's data until the form is completed. It's worth noting that there is commercial software available to handle this type of application.
Java (not the same as JavaScript discussed above) provides many more functions in forms, but still has many restrictions for the serious forms user. Its primary advantage is its cross-platform capability and the ability to fill out a form without the need for special software other than a suitable browser. Remember that the browser must be Java enabled. At the time of writing, this capability is problematic, as Java hasn't been implemented the same way in all the well-known browsers. In fact, it isn't even implemented identically in the same brand of browser across different platforms such as Windows and Macintosh. As with HTML forms, Java prevents the user from saving the form with the data and it also doesn’t always allow the form to be printed with the data. Printing may be possible if the form is signed with an electronic signature and permission is granted to the user to print or if the user sets security to a low level.
While it has a lot of advantages, it has the major disadvantage that the Java classes (the mini programs that make Java forms work) have to be downloaded each time. This isn’t a real problem for a form that has to be filled out only once, but for internal use where the form might be used many times, it can be a time-consuming process.
PDF forms have advantages where forms are to be downloaded off the Internet for printing only. The file sizes can vary but are often considerably smaller than the graphic files they reproduce and the printing quality is excellent provided the user has a suitable printer and can use Adobe Type Manager® software. Forms are opened using Adobe’s Acrobat Reader software. It is an ideal solution when graphics have to be downloaded and when the user may not have all the included fonts. The latest version now handles fillable form fields and increased intelligence.
However, it has three main disadvantages for serious electronic forms work. It lacks built-in forms management capability, has limited intelligent functionality without the use of complex JavaScript programming and forms cannot be saved with their data intact without the use of the full Adobe Acrobat program or Adobe Acrobat Approval. The attraction of PDF is that Adobe Acrobat Reader is free. But remember that this software only provides limited functionality. If full functionality is required, users have to purchase Adobe Acrobat program or Adobe Acrobat Approval and the form designers have to be competent JavaScript programmers. Note that JavaScript is required for even the most basic field calculations.
Some people are misled by the apparent ability to fill out PDF forms within a web browser. I say "apparent" because while the document appears in the browser window, the Adobe Acrobat Reader program is still required. It is actually the Adobe Acrobat Reader window that the user is looking at, but it is contained inside the normal browser window that will limit screen space if you only have a small monitor.
It’s not my intention here to discredit PDF as a format since it does have many positive uses–in fact, we use it extensively in our company. While the PDF format does have some limitations, if you only need to produce a copy that can be printed (even in colour) then PDF can be an excellent solution. Even for small forms filled out on line from a web page in a single sitting it can be a useful tool.
The most recent version of Adobe Acrobat and its associated products does significantly improve the way electronic forms can be used. It is possible to send just the data of a form (in FDF format rather than PDF), greatly reducing the transmission time, and the end user has to import the data into a copy of the original file. However, the person sending the data still needs to have Adobe Acrobat or Adobe Acrobat Approval software. Adobe Acrobat Reader doesn't have that capability.
There are a number of products on the market which enable the form designer to produce forms as stand-alone applications (".exe" files). These can be downloaded and used without the need for special software–at least, that's what the manufacturers claim. In fact, the special software is built into the form application itself–it has to be built-in if the form is to have any intelligence.
I recently reviewed the specifications for a program where the developers provide 2 demonstration forms—one of them quite small. Yet the downloaded compressed file is over
1.35 MB in size. Once decompressed, it installed 6 items for form 1 (90k), 5 items for form 2 (237 k) plus some database files as well as installing 1.3 MB of files in the System Directory. This is a total of 1.646 MB of files for only 2 forms. The forms had very limited functionality. Just imagine the size of the files if they were complex.
While the developers claim that no special filler software is needed, and hence no filler licence, special software IS needed if normal e-forms functionality is to be included. The basic version is extremely limited. I redrew the forms in another program, complete with calculations, lookup lists and data base connections and the form sizes were only 16k (Form 1) and 28k (Form 2). When you consider that this is almost 300k less than the stand-alone file (15%), I wonder about the value of such an approach.
There is also the problem that it was only Windows-based. Our experience is that many members of the general public use Apple Macintosh computers and that use of such limited software is a severe disadvantage. Web-based forms need to be cross-platform if they are to truly serve the needs of the community at large.
I'm not suggesting that you should never use such an approach, but am just warning about the issues and the need to take all your needs (and your users' needs) into consideration. Where the typical user would only ever download one or two forms, it could be a great cost saver and still do the job adequately. But if there were many forms, it is not an efficient system.
This is the easiest approach to using forms on the web. As long as the user's browser has been correctly configured, it will automatically save (and possibly open) the form as soon as it has been downloaded. The disadvantage is that the user has to have a copy of the software and this, too, may have to be downloaded the first time it is needed. Where the filler is likely to need to fill out a number of forms, this approach can be the most efficient.
The software may even automatically configure the web browser to use it as a helper application.
This approach enables the user to open the form from within a web browser. While the plug-in approach can be a great advantage in using PDF documents in that the user can read a page at a time, there is little advantage in this with a PDF form, since the whole form has to be used.
I've come across vendors who promote the plug-in approach, telling potential customers that they are getting "thin client" software and that "thick client" is out of date. Yet all the plug-in does is replace a filler program. So it's really "thick client".
Deciding the approach is not always easy, especially for an internal system. You have to balance the desire to use the latest technology, and especially low cost technology, against its limitations. At the time of writing this, very few organisations are making effective use of intranets. We still have a great deal to learn, but it is obvious that it is also very easy to get things wrong and that the easy way out is rarely the best. My advice is to examine your needs carefully before you launch into putting your forms on an intranet.
The biggest problem I have seen to date occurs when organisations decide to make all their forms available for use within a web browser–often referred to as the "thin client" approach. To the inexperienced, it seems like a simple and effective solution to the paperwork burden, but the problems it introduces usually far outweigh the perceived advantages. You need to thoroughly understand the advantages and disadvantages of the different approaches discussed earlier in this paper.
Even for public-use forms, the solution is by no means easy. As I write, a report has appeared in The Australian newspaper.
“Less than a year after the ‘whole-of-government’ approach to IT outsourcing dropped totally out of federal fashion, the idea that all government services should be available on line is looking seriously uncool.
Reporting on its third study of the use of Internet technology by governments, Deloitte Research has reported that demand for online provision of government services available via other channels rarely goes beyond 30 per cent of customers surveyed.”
Our company's experience with customers over the past year backs up this claim. While we've helped numerous organisations to produce web-based forms (either fillable or just PDF for print), we're frequently told that many people prefer to have a paper copy sent rather than use the Internet to download a copy. After all, why should people pay for Internet time when they can get the form free of charge.
In Reengineering The Corporation, the authors stress the importance of using technology the right way.2
"A company that cannot change the way it thinks about information technology cannot reengineer. A company that equates technology with automation cannot reengineer. A company that looks for problems first and then seeks technology solutions for them cannot reengineer.
"...to paraphrase what is often said about money and government, merely throwing computers at an existing business problem does not cause it to be reengineered. In fact, the misuse of technology can block reengineering altogether by reinforcing old ways of thinking and old behavior patterns."
They go on to explain that re-engineering is about innovation and achieving entirely new goals by exploiting the latest technological capabilities. For example, a nationwide bank is unable to introduce electronic forms because the standard copper telephone lines cannot handle the heavy data load. But place a satellite dish on the roof of every branch and copper lines no longer have to be used.
While this paper deals with all types of electronic forms, this section deals primarily with issues for organisations considering electronic forms for internal use. The comments can apply to public-use forms, but these have other issues as well that aren't covered here.
This is one of the most important considerations for electronic forms given the current state of technology.
The problem can be tested very simply. Just try sending a graphic file over a network and see how long it takes. Even using very crude drawing tools such as those found in word processing software, produces files much larger than the raw data the forms contain. For example, a simple leave application form with around 20 fields and associated captions, takes up around 85k of space when produced with a good drawing program such as Macromedia FreeHand®. The same form drawn with Microsoft Word® occupies 20k, yet the actual data might only be around 100 characters plus signature information.
The ideal electronic forms system provides for the transmission of the data only with each user—filler and reader—having a copy of the graphic on hand.
A related matter is the storage space required to hold the graphic for each individual form. If the graphic is held once only and the data overlayed, there are huge reductions in storage requirements.
Another issue concerns what happens when everyone downloads forms over a network and what happens when the network goes down. This is a common computer problem in many organisations, but compounds operational problems when all the organisation's forms are electronic.
Finally, there are legality issues concerning what can be used in evidence and so on. These need to be addressed by each organisation separately.
Suitable hardware will be a major issue for anyone wanting to use in-house electronic forms.
To start with, every user will need a computer capable of handling display of graphics. At the present time, this means a minimum of a 386 PC or 68030 Macintosh and preferably a Pentium or PowerPC Macintosh. As well as a powerful processor, each user needs a suitable monitor. While the ideal monitor will display 1024 x 768 pixels or more (14.3 x 10.7 inches, a little smaller than A3 landscape) or even greater, we recommend at least SVGA, 800 x 600 pixels (11.1 x 8.3 inches, a little smaller than A4 or letter size landscape). Smaller monitors make filling out electronic forms very frustrating.
The next requirement is the need for superb networking. This will require the advice of a networking specialist.
Finally, there will be the need for suitable local printers. People will still need to print paper copies and your printers will need to be able to handle the output. Depending on the software used, all your printers may have to be PostScript. One of the important issues is that the image area of your printed forms will have to be limited to the capability of your worst printer. If some of your staff use ink jet printers that put a very large margin at the bottom of the form, then this severely restricts your design capability.
Even if you do have the right hardware, will you have sufficient for EVERYONE? If you are going to do away with the paper version of a form, how will people fill in the electronic version if they don't have a computer available? What will happen if a user has to wait to fill in a form because all the computers are in use? Can you allow multiple users to have access to a single computer? If so, are there any security and confidentiality issues?
Electronic forms software is certainly coming of age, but there is still a lot of embryonic software on the market so you need to be careful in what you choose. Even basic functionality such as version control is still not available from many vendors.
It still amazes me how often clients tell me that they are going to introduce electronic forms and then tell me that they will be using their word processing software. Sure, you can design crude forms in some word processors, and even export filled data to a database, but it is a major programming effort to turn these into fully automated electronic forms.
Another important consideration is the design functionality of the software. While most specialised electronic forms software has good database, networking and printing capabilities, it is often severely lacking on the design side. It's not much use being able to print your forms on every laser printer known to man if you can't design them properly in the first place. Far too often, the decision on electronic forms software is left to computer experts who don't understand the information design and graphic needs. Selection of suitable software involves collaboration between both the computer and information design specialists. One of the key issues on the design capability is ease of use and the speed with which forms can be designed and modified. Updating forms when changes are needed is often an urgent requirement, especially with government forms. You don't need software that is so difficult to use that the update can't be produced in time. Especially important is the ease with which intelligence capability of the form can be updated or modified.
Good software will also have sound forms management capabilities. These are dealt with later in the paper. It will also allow the user to program the interface with customised buttons and other tools that reduce the need for training and handling enquiries.
Finally, you will need to consider the issues of media life, future availability of software and accessibility of data years down the line. How many people today can access all the computer data they generated even five years ago? Even CD-ROM's can have a limited life. A recent scientific report revealed that there is a physical virus that eats the aluminium on CD's and can destroy them.
Design for electronic forms is far more complex than for paper forms. Electronic forms require a lot more than just desktop publishing or computer skills.
While the basic design skills are the same as for paper forms, the analyst needs a broader technical understanding of database design and linkages, and a very good understanding of workflow and procedures analysis. The use of electronic forms requires a much higher level of analytical skill while still retaining the graphic and spatial skills of the designer.
The organisation which employs graphic artists and clerical staff to design paper forms will face a significant change in its staffing policy and salary levels if it decides to introduce electronic forms. In contrast to this, organisations that try to place the electronic forms activity solely within the computing function, soon find that the people in that area generally lack the necessary human relations, spatial and design skills. The designer of electronic forms is truly a forms analyst and should be employed as such.
When I started working on the management of electronic forms, I wondered how such a vast subject could be covered in a few pages. But as I analysed the material it became clear that there is very little difference between electronic and paper forms. You still have to manage people, design, systems integration, versions, indexing, distribution, maintenance, user assistance users and most of the other forms management matters. But, while many of the principles remain the same, there are some specific issues that need to be addressed.
This is a matter that falls back into the hands of the forms management department. Where paper forms might have been distributed by the purchasing and stores functions, this is no longer necessary and they need to be strictly controlled by the forms area.
With paper forms, staff could use old versions, even for years, without necessarily causing major problems in other parts of the organisation. This doesn't happen with electronic forms because the version has to be the latest or conflicts will occur, especially if desktop filler software is being used. Simple systems may involve sending out new versions via floppy disk or CD-ROM while more advanced systems allow for updating over a computer network. There need to be formal procedures in place to ensure that updating is immediate, that every user knows what to do and knows that a change has taken place.
Computer people often choose a web browser solution for electronic forms so that they don't have to be concerned with installing filler software on user desktops. But this isn't necessarily a problem. In Australia there has been considerable use of electronic forms by the government for the general public. There are hundreds of thousands of people using electronic forms where they have to download and install desktop filler software, and with very few exceptions this all happens smoothly and easily with few calls to help lines. The key lies with using software that is easy to install together with clear, simple, easy-to-follow instructions.
This is an area that is often misunderstood, especially by vendors. It is not just control over the issuing of new versions, but control over what versions people are able to use.
It is more complex than with paper forms, preferably with specialised software and, at the very least, strict procedural controls. It is one of the major problems that will be faced by organisations using word processing software for their electronic forms, since these applications make no provision for it.
It is normal practice for electronic forms systems to store the graphic once with data entered via a template over the graphic. When the form is sent via electronic mail, only the data is transmitted, speeding up the transmission time and avoiding network blockages. This creates a number of questions for the electronic forms manager which specialised software should be able to deal with.
How do you ensure that all users have the current version of both the form graphic and the data fill program? How do users know that they have the latest version? If multiple versions are allowable, how do users know which one to use for the data they are entering? If users want to look up old data, how do they know which version of the form to use? If multiple versions are not allowable, how can old data be viewed if the new form is not compatible.
Suppose a person fills in a form on a Friday afternoon and sends it to the manager for approval and electronic signature. Over the weekend, the forms management department sends out an updated version over the network that automatically updates everybody's copy of the form. The new version has additional fields, drops some of the old fields and reorders the sequence. What happens when the manager tries to open the form and the data doesn't match his version? These questions must be answered before an electronic forms system is implemented. Some software has the controls built in. In other cases, the controls may have to be carried out manually. Either way, they are essential or an organisation-wide electronic forms system just won't work after the first year or so.
Who will control distribution? If needed, will you have cooperation from local network administrators? How will they feel about additional work? It may be politically good, giving them more work and securing their positions; but it may be politically bad because they are overworked already and will not be given extra staff when the organisation is downsizing.
There are two aspects to this subject and they can both be covered very easily.
First, there is the matter of a master index. If you have a forms management program in place this will already be solved because the paper and electronic forms index should be able to be stored in the one database.
The more important issue is the matter of indexing for the user. How do people find the right form? They're not like paper forms that can be seen on a shelf or in a cupboard. Will you have the same index for everyone in the organisation? This could be a problem if your organisation has 40,000 different forms—or even 4,000. Can users open the forms direct from the index? Are indexing and library facilities built in to the forms software? Designing separate indexing software may introduce additional complexities that will hinder the system's maintenance.
I'm a strong advocate of using electronic document management software and especially software that includes workflow processing. This type of software is now readily available and makes the widespread use of electronic forms (either desktop filler or web browser based) much more viable. I have more to say about this later.
This will be one of the major disadvantages of electronic forms if it is not handled properly.
Fraud has been a significant problem with paper forms since their inception, and dealing with it is still a major consideration in many organisations. This was highlighted by Peter Duerden, Chairman of Royal Insurance in a 1980 report to shareholders:
"There was another altogether unsavoury factor in the huge underwriting loss: An increasing incidence of fraudulent claims on insurers. Fraud Arson, Fraud Burglary and Fraud Motor Claims are costing the industry and its honest policyholders dearly."
An Australian report by the National Roads and Motorists Association in The Insurance Record in 1983 stated that:
"NRMA is also concerned at the number of fraudulent claims made against insurance companies, and the attitude that insurance companies are 'fair game' for this practice."
The report went on to list the actions taken by the NRMA in dealing with fraud. One of these was stated as follows:
"NRMA Insurance attempts to ensure that vehicles are not over-insured, thus eliminating incentive for fraudulent claims.
"When a person seeks to obtain insurance he must answer questions on the age and condition of the car, the amount he paid for it and from whom he bought it. When these questions are answered properly, skilled NRMA staff can determine its correct value. If a person does not answer the questions truthfully, he risks having his policy cancelled from the date it was taken out."
While these matters deal with one of the major aspects of fraud, another is the matter of documents being altered after they are filled in. With paper documents, such changes can often be detected by the appearance of different coloured ink and damaged paper.
One of the most common forms of document authentication is the use of signatures. They are recognised internationally as providing a secure means of identifying the writer. With normal electronic documents, these protective measures are missing. Scanned signatures provide no protection at all, since anyone can insert them. Data can be altered or removed and remain undetected since it is not in physical form.
To overcome these problems, electronic forms use digital signatures. Without them, sensitive electronic forms that require approval must be signed by hand after printing. This defeats the prime purpose of electronic forms—the sending of data direct from one person to another via electronic mail.
The use of digital signatures was well summed up John Murphy of Shana Corporation, a leading Canadian company in electronic forms development.
"A digital signature is not a scanned image of a person's handwritten signature. Instead, it is based on sophisticated public key cryptography, a technology common in many high end security systems. A digital signature system relies on pairs of electronic keys for each user. Each pair consists of a public key and a private key. Keys are typically managed by the security administrator in an organization.
"To sign a form, the user enters a personal code to unlock his or her private key. This key is used to generate the digital signature by applying various encryption algorithms to generate what can be described as a sophisticated checksum of the information on the form. This checksum, along with the signer's public key is attached to, and remains with the form. Anyone can later verify the digital signature. The verification process is similar to the process of creating the digital signature [except] the signer's public key is used for verification purposes. If a digital signature verifies successfully, the following are known:
"...an electronic form can be designed with more than one 'signature cell', each of which can sign different information on the form. Approval rules can be built into the form to ensure that the correct people sign the correct forms, therefore further reducing errors and the costs associated with repeating approval cycles." 3
There are some related issues. With sensitive documents and data, what happens when the user is away from the computer? Do other people have access? What about forms sent to someone while they are away? Will they be retrieved by somebody who can access them?
Finally, there is the matter of unique identification of documents. Will you have automated serial numbering or random number allocation using techniques such as time and date. Documents such as purchase orders and invoices generally need sequential numbering. Does your system allow this?
Forget the buzz words—do you know what "workflow" really is?
Many people think of workflow solely in terms of data flow around networks, but the primary application in electronic forms work relates to the work that people actually do, irrespective of whether it is on a computer. Contrary to what a lot of vendors want you to believe, there is nothing new about workflow and workflow analysis. I was doing that 35 years ago, only we called it "Organisation and Methods" or "O & M".
On the other hand, "workflow tracking" does refer to the tracking of network data. The main issue is how to locate forms that move between a number of users? Some software has the facility built in. If this is not available, you will need to introduce manual procedures. Some software is also ODMA compliant, which enables it to work with document management software that is based on ODMA standards such as PCDOCS™, or it may have built-in capability to work with applications such as FileNet Panagon™
This is an area where response time may need to improve significantly. People can work their way around problems with paper forms, but you can find that electronic forms "bugs" need immediate attention. When you set up your program, you will have to be prepared for this response.
This in turn may create serious problems for you when distributing such changes. Let's suppose your forms have been distributed via CD-ROM or some other high volume medium. Such media will be indexed to allow the users to gain easy access to the forms, so how do you distribute the change? Do you send out a completely revised CD-ROM? If you send out the change on a floppy disk, how does it fit into the index and how do you stop users from using the old version, especially since with most current technology, you can't delete CD-ROM documents.
These same issues apply to new versions. What if a form has previously been filled in using the old version. The users may still need to keep the old CD-ROM so that they can access the old document. Remember, the database files store the data, not the graphic.
It's important to consider all the issues and to learn as much as you can BEFORE major implementation. This will help you to avoid political backlash from early failure—the same issue that you would face with any forms management program that is badly implemented.
The experience of organisations that have installed electronic forms systems around the world is that it must be taken slowly.
Remember that electronic forms take far longer to design than paper forms. Graphic design can take longer, depending on the software you use. But the greatest extra time comes from analysis and programming. It is absolutely essential to thoroughly analyse field needs such as maximum size, content and user problems. Finally will be the need for thorough testing, not just of the programming aspects, but observational useability studies of actual form filling.
At the 1992 Symposium of the Business Forms Management Association, Robert P. Sherry, Group Vice President of the Gartner Group, warned against letting vendors get away with placing emphasis on revenue.
"...the companies, IBM, Apple and Microsoft are developing more technologies to make more profits."
He also stressed that there in no one vendor that can supply all the technology for an organisation-wide electronic forms system. He said:
"We now have an entanglement of technology... The most important thing in any organisation is information—not the technology."
He went on to talk about the need for all organisations to have:
"an electronic output strategy—a documented and measurable plan to deliver information in the most appropriate format and media, employing the most appropriate processes to meet or exceed customer requirements."
There was consistent agreement that technology was still limited and that integration of the components was complex.
A most telling statement came from Jim Donohue, Xerox VP for Standards, Strategy and Architecture when he said:
"It takes a long time to develop a good electronic form system."
Peter Preksto, a Vice President of BLOC Development Corporation, one of the early companies in the electronic forms business, stated that:
"The forms automation market is one that seems full of rich potential, to date mostly untapped. Despite the benefits of automation, clearly apparent to forms professionals, forms themselves are the Rodney Dangerfield of business tools: they get no respect. Forms are everywhere, commonplace. Therefore, they are usually underestimated in all respects: how hard it is to create them, to fill them out, to move them around an enterprise, to extract their information, etc.
"Often companies which explore the new technology discover that their approach was too simplistic and didn't take into consideration the true difficulty of the task, the realities of legacy computer systems, the resistance of employees to use what turns out to be clumsy software to do something that was once as easy as picking up a pen.
"...It is impossible for a company to absorb forms automation in one fell swoop. Instead, the technology will be absorbed in phases.
"Currently, customers require substantial on screen forms completion and printing, with a strong demand for support of existing PCs (which may be several generations old) and fast filling and printing performance. Although everyone is talking about forms routing, most organizations face substantial barriers as they implement networks, decide on directory systems, choose or upgrade electronic mail, build electronic organizational charts. When forms-centered workflow automation becomes a reality, it will not be based on a trivial connection to an e-mail icon." 4
It is understandable that management wants to save costs, reduce paper, cut back on printing and limit the number of stored forms. Electronic forms technology holds out great hope that this can be achieved. When the technology was introduced, many organisations were excited about replacing all their paper forms. Some years later these same organisations were realising what a slow and costly process it is. It can't be done overnight. In spite of the sales claims, the development of workable electronic forms takes time, skill and money. In fact, without very careful planning, electronic forms will cost more than the paper they are designed to replace. And even if the software was of a high standard and the designers were available to produce professional forms, many organisations still don't have the hardware or networking capability to process them.
The early experience should sound as a warning to be cautious. Forms technology will no doubt change significantly, but potential users should tread carefully. Not only is much of the software limited in its functionality, but upgrading to suitable hardware in many organisations is an impossible economic burden.
My advice is to proceed slowly; choose software wisely; seek expert help from forms professionals; start with small pilot studies; and then, when you really know what you are doing, you will be ready to make a wise investment.
Robert Sherry, in his opening address at BFMA's 1992 Symposium, said: "there is a tremendous opportunity for the people in this room."
Speaker after speaker reiterated this theme and placed great emphasis on the need for forms and computer systems integration. Peter Shaw of Data Business Forms in Canada had some very important points to make on the ownership of automated forms:
"No one will own the forms automation marketplace. There will be no 'winner'. Because it is essentially a tools and services market place requiring extensive consultation and customization, it will be serviced by a large number of companies who have a trusted relationship, proven over many years, of delivering working solutions meeting customer needs. The IBM's, DEC's and XEROX's of this world still want to sell hardware and prepackaged software. They no doubt will provide excellent products as components for forms automation implementation. However, they are not set up to provide the intimate business consultation and customization services which will be required.
Likewise the large software houses, Microsoft, Lotus, Borland, Novell, and WordPerfect will deliver enabling technologies and lay claim to this marketplace. Again, however, their expertise is in the prepacked solution, one size fits all. Many useful products (LANS, E-Mail Services, Bridges, etc.) will be produced, but once again, they will not provide the service of getting to know the customer's business and participating in a partnership to customize a solution." 5
This was said almost 10 years ago and I've no doubt that much of this will change in time as hardware and software houses change their approach. But his final statements about knowing the business and participating in partnerships is a vital key to the management of effective electronic forms systems.
There needs to be a close relationship between forms systems professionals and computer professionals, and to work closely with end users of proposed systems. Forms analysis is moving away from the old days of graphic design and pretty printing. But rather than fearing redundancy from automation, forms and records professionals need to be looking to new skills, and the exciting challenges that lie ahead.
There are four basic aspects that you will need to consider. Your form designers will need at least basic training in the relevant software and fundamental issues of electronic forms design. As they gain some experience this will need to be supplemented with training in advanced techniques such as field and macro programming.
Then you may need to consider training for network administrators. In large organisations, these people are often the first point of call if there are problems, so they need to understand basic software issues and be able to distinguish electronic forms problems from networking problems.
For all the training, you will need to consider who will do it. Suitable trainers will need to have experience in using the software, but will also need to know about analysis and workflow issues.
This is potentially the biggest trouble area for the forms manager, especially when electronic forms are first installed. If staff are only used to using paper forms, their approach to electronic forms could send the program off the rails if you don't make the task easy and provide effective training. Users will tend to approach the forms based on their past experience, if any, with computers.
If their sole experience is mainframe computers, they're likely to be totally confused by "windows", "pull-down menus", "buttons" and screens that look like works of art rather than bland text layouts.
On the other hand, if their sole experience is with word processing on a PC, they'll most likely want your electronic forms to work much the same way as their current WP software. Our experience shows that many people who are new to this environment, enjoy using the mouse and may avoid tabbing and other keyboard actions. This is not necessarily a major problem, but it highlights the need to teach people what to do and to provide an easy to use interface.
Similar problems are now occurring with people whose primary use of a computer is for Internet use. I've come across so many people who expect every computer program to work just like a web browser.
Electronic form-filling software often has complex menus and tools in its standard format. To reduce the volume of telephone enquiries into the forms department, I strongly advise customising the forms by reducing the number of menu items and ribbon buttons so that you only give people essential tools. For example, many electronic forms may only need facilities for new, open, close, quit, save, print, send, fax, return to main index and move to different pages.
The more you can automate the process with on-screen instructions, the less time you will have to spend on the phone answering enquiries. The larger the organisation and the more users you have, the greater this problem becomes.
Implementing a standard forms management program requires careful planning so that by the time it goes live, all your basic administration is in place. Once people know that you can do a good job with their forms, they come running for help. Electronic forms may be even worse in this regard. If your initial burst of activity produces real cost saving and if the users are lovers of the latest technogadgets, then you could find yourself so swamped with enquiries that you don't get anything done. Experience to date is that electronic forms are one of the greatest fads to hit the business world, and everyone wants to get on the bandwagon. So, when you start out, make sure you can handle the possible flood of user enquiries.
This is probably the main key to having a sound electronic forms system. Since the late 1970's there has been a great deal of research into the way people use forms and other paper documents. We now know much more about normal form-using behaviour and I believe that, for the most part, we can design paper forms that have a good chance of working well at the first try.
Peter Drucker makes an important point in his book "Managing in a Time of Great Change" .
"A 'database', no matter how copious, is not information. It is information's ore. For raw material to become information, it must be organized for a task, directed towards specific performance, applied to a decision. Raw material cannot do that itself. Nor can information specialists. They can cajole their customers, the data users. They can advise, demonstrate, teach. But they can no more manage data for users than a personnel department can take over the management of the people who work with an executive." 6
We have a lot of experience with behaviour in entering data onto computer screens and this is well documented by Wilbert Galitz 7 & 8. But at the time of writing, we still know next to nothing about how people use electronic forms. Our experience to date indicates that it is best to start with very small pilot systems of maybe a dozen or so forms to learn what people do, what they expect, and the sort of practical problems they are likely to face.
When you first introduce electronic forms, users will be unfamiliar with the concepts. When you are designing their first electronic forms and you ask them how they want to use it, you may find that they don't give you all the information you need—they may not understand what electronic forms can do. Later, when they have used the first draft, they'll be able to give you more useful information.
It's important to remember that as people gain experience, their needs change. Some time down the line we will have the situation where most form fillers will be using electronic forms and will understand the concepts. But right now, many form fillers don't even have experience with computers. Many people still don't even like computers and are afraid of them. Ben Schneiderman made an important point in his book on screen design that I believe is still valid.9
"It would be naive to assume that widespread use of computers brings only benefits. There are legitimate reasons to worry that increased dissemination of computers might lead to a variety of oppressions personal, organizational, political, or social. People who fear computers have good reasons for their concerns. Computer system designers have an opportunity and responsibility to be alert to the dangers and to make thoughtful decisions about reducing the dangers they perceive."
I would expect that in the next 5 to 10 years, training needs will be different. We'll know a lot more about electronic-form fillers and they'll know a lot more about the process. In the mean time, don't be confused by the sellers of software whose main aim seems to be to sell boxes, rather than solutions.
Where electronic forms are integrated with computer systems, the link is far more critical and needs much more analysis and care than is usually taken with paper forms. The main problem for forms managers is that this extra work means more time and eventually a larger number of skilled forms professionals on the team.
Design of electronic forms is more complex than for paper forms. The designer of paper forms can get away with poor spacing and inefficient layout because form fillers generally grumble and work their way around the problems. This doesn't work with electronic forms. If a box is too small, the data won't be entered since the computer doesn't know to write smaller or cramp the style. Electronic forms have to be right, the space has to be sufficient for the largest entries and the sequence has to be spot on.
Many years ago I learned that computerising a bad system doesn't improve productivity. With electronic forms, the issue is even more critical since you are dealing with the primary tool of trade of a large proportion of the work force. Don't just convert paper forms to electronic format for the sake of using technology.
You will need to learn about how people work and how they use the forms in the real business world. Can you introduce automation into the forms that will improve user productivity? Can electronic forms simplify work processes? How does work flow from one person to another? Can the flow be simplified to reduce duplication? Can the transfer of data be automated? Unless you study the business processes first, you'll never know.
Far too many designers of electronic forms make their layouts complicated. A key to effective use is to keep the screen simple and uncluttered, leaving ample fill in space and making the text easy to read.
A major issue faced by many organisations in the early stages is the concern about acceptance by users. In an attempt to make the introduction of automation more palatable, it is common practice to start by converting existing paper forms to electronic format, keeping the layout identical—or at least very similar. In some organisations—or with specific forms—this may be important. In many cases, it will be a deterrent to good form design.
There are three major drawbacks is this approach. First: paper form layout is designed for hand entry and often has totally different space needs to electronic entry. Second: if there are any problems with the paper form, there isn't much point in magnifying those problems with a computer. Third: layout, legibility and spacing needs for screen entry bear little relationship to those needed to fit all the information on a fixed size sheet of paper.
So, before designing your electronic forms this way, you need to be sure that you really do have a NEED for them to be the same as the paper forms. An effective compromise can be to design the screen layouts for data entry to suit that application, but to design a separate printing layout.
The above problems are especially noticeable when electronic forms are produced by scanning existing paper forms. There is software that will intelligently convert a scanned image into editable text and graphics, and even automatically create fillable fields if the original design has been appropriately produced. The software can be very clever and, provided you have suitable forms, work well. However, there are some major issues you need to consider before taking this approach.
Such software relies on the original design being suitable for conversion. Our experience to date is that many forms cannot be scanned effectively—the designs being inappropriate for the conversion process. That's not to say that it cannot be done—rather you should check the software capability to handle all the styles of design that you use to make sure that your forms will work.
Most of our research into forms use shows that it is highly unlikely that existing forms will all be satisfactory for conversion to electronic format. In fact, research into forms use over the past 20 years shows that a very high percentage of forms are wrongly filled in— and the NUMBER ONE CAUSE is bad form design. Just automating a bad form is not going to solve your forms problems.
Drawing the layout is such a small component of electronic form design that in many cases it is hardly worth the effort to scan the old form. Our experience is that it would generally be faster and more productive to redraw the form with an improved layout. And, as already stated, paper form layout is often inappropriate to electronic forms.
On the other hand, if you have many simple forms that are suitable for scanning-based conversion and you have appropriate software, it may save you some initial implementation time. Just remember that this software is designed for scanning EXISTING forms. Once you have converted your forms, there is no further need for scanning, so you will need to take a different approach anyway.
As with paper forms, it is necessary to clearly differentiate captions and questions from the variable data. This can be done typographically, but can often be enhanced using different coloured type for the data.
As already mentioned, space needs for electronic forms are different to paper forms. In a paper form, if you don't leave enough space, the user just writes smaller or attaches another sheet of paper. In an electronic form, this usually won't work. The space needs have to be right in the first place unless you have auto-expanding fields.
And two final things to avoid: don't cover data entry areas with help windows, and avoid auto-tabbing—a cause of many data entry errors.
This is a simple matter, but one that could save you a lot of headaches in the long term. Keep a record of user issues and problems, solutions to design problems, macro and programming solutions, and examples of good and bad layouts.
This is a point that I cannot stress enough. There isn't the space here to go into the matter in detail, so I'll just cover the main issues.
There are three aspects that need testing. First: do the users understand how to use the forms and what the questions mean? Second: Does the electronic form carry out ALL the user needs? Third: does the form actually work?
As I've explained at length in my book Forms For People, testing is not just getting opinions. It involves seeing the form in action. One of the most effective methods is to use one-on-one observational useability studies. These help you to see exactly where users go wrong and where they fail to understand the form. They're relatively cheap to conduct, yet provide a great amount of detail.
James Diggs, IBM
"The quality of our services will only improve if the quality of the processes
improves." Robert Sherry, Gartner Group
"Organisations need an electronic output strategy."
Jim Donohue, Xerox
"It takes a long time to develop a good electronic forms system."
Robert Barnett and Associates Pty Ltd PO Box 95, Belconnen ACT 2616, Australia Phone 61 2 6241 9022 Fax 61 2 6241 9023 Email: info@RBAinformationdesign.com.au