Sign of Things to Come

Published by Lex on

It seems to me that a lot of our information practices are about documentation more so than productivity. Not that there is anything wrong with documentation per se, but it seems to be documenting things in a less than useful way.

The signature documentation process is a legacy of our legal system that predates automation. It seems to me that rethinking the signature process for binding documentation might be more effective if the experience were a little less convoluted.

The process for automating signature collection feels like it came out of a sausage factory. It is hideously complex mess. Is it better than the old paper process where the document had to make the rounds sequentially? Undoubtedly, it speeds up the process overall, but is this really the best way to sign off on documents that you probably haven’t read.

The experience is painful for those creating the documents and a little awkward for those having to sign the document.

Is the risk of misunderstanding and fraud any higher or lower depending on whether the signature took place electronically or in person?

It seems to me that reducing the complexity of the documents that need to be signed and reducing the process of signing would be a more productive solution.


0 Comments

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *