Iron Mountain going back to roots in storage services

Posted on Apr 27, 2011 in Records Management News

Iron Moun­tain going back to roots in stor­age ser­vices
Com­pany changes direc­tion, con­sid­ers sell­ing off dig­i­tal busi­ness
By Lucas Mear­ian
April 27, 2011 06:00 AM ET

Com­put­er­world — A week after Iron Moun­tain announced it had replaced its CEO, the com­pany said it’s con­sid­er­ing sell­ing its archiv­ing, e-discovery and online backup and recov­ery busi­ness to return to its roots in doc­u­ment and tape stor­age services.

“There’s no guar­an­tee a deal will get done because we’re still early in the process, but we have good inter­est. And as you can imag­ine these processes take a mat­ter of a few months, before we know it will unwind itself,” said Richard Reese, who abruptly took over as CEO on April 14.

Iron Mountain Calms Bondholders on $2.2 Billion Payout: Corporate Finance

Posted on Apr 21, 2011 in Records Management News

By Sapna Mahesh­wari and Danielle Kucera — Apr 20, 2011 11:00 PM CT

Iron Moun­tain Inc. (IRM), the doc­u­ment– stor­age com­pany that was pres­sured by Elliott Man­age­ment Corp. to change its strat­egy, is per­suad­ing the bond mar­ket it can reward share­hold­ers with­out harm­ing its creditworthiness.

The company’s $300 mil­lion of 8 per­cent notes due June 2020 rose for the first time in six days yes­ter­day, gain­ing 0.25 cent to 103.5 cents on the dol­lar, accord­ing to Trace, the bond-price report­ing sys­tem of the Finan­cial Indus­try Reg­u­la­tory Authority.

Iron Moun­tain Chief Exec­u­tive Offi­cer Richard Reese assured debt investors yes­ter­day the Boston-based company’s lever­age would face no more than a “slight increase” as it returns $2.2 bil­lion to share­hold­ers through 2013. Last month, hedge fund Elliott Man­age­ment called for a review of Iron Moun­tain, cit­ing a loss of share­holder value from parts of its inter­na­tional and dig­i­tal businesses.

“The sources of the funds are com­ing, by and large, from oper­a­tions, free cash flow, as well as from a slight increase in our lever­age,” Reese, 65, who led the com­pany between 1981 and 2008 and resumed that role last week, said in a con­fer­ence call. “I want to be real clear to the debt mar­kets who might be lis­ten­ing, or hope­fully are lis­ten­ing, we’re talk­ing about going from a lit­tle under 3 times lever­aged to 3.5.”
12-Month Return

The return to share­hold­ers in the next 12 months will be $1.2 bil­lion, includ­ing “poten­tial one-time div­i­dends,” in addi­tion to quar­terly dis­tri­b­u­tions and share buy­backs, Iron Moun­tain said in a state­ment on April 19.

The 8 per­cent notes fell to 103.25 cents on the dol­lar that day to yield 7.46 per­cent, Trace data show. The debt traded at 107.6 cents with a 6.92 per­cent yield on March 2, Trace data show.

The aver­age B rated secu­rity yields 7.38 per­cent, accord­ing to Bank of Amer­ica Mer­rill Lynch index data. The senior sub­or­di­nated notes from Iron Moun­tain are graded B1 by Moody’s Investors Ser­vice and B+ by Stan­dard & Poor’s, accord­ing to data com­piled by Bloomberg.

Investors were con­cerned the com­pany might take on more debt to make pay­outs to fend off pres­sure from share­hold­ers, said Sabur Moini, a money man­ager who over­sees more than $2 bil­lion of high-yield debt at Los Angeles-based Pay­den & Rygel, includ­ing bonds from Iron Moun­tain.
‘Not Bondholder-Friendly’

“When­ever news like this comes out, it’s bad for the bonds because the expec­ta­tion is that the com­pany to save itself will have to do some­thing that’s not bondholder-friendly,” Moini said. “It prob­a­bly makes sense to take in more infor­ma­tion and not be one of the first to sell at a low print,” he said on April 19.

Iron Moun­tain ini­tially adopted a so-called poison-pill pro­vi­sion, meant to keep dis­si­dent investors from gain­ing con­trol of it. Last week, Bob Bren­nan resigned as CEO, and the com­pany said in an April 19 state­ment it plans to sell parts of its dig­i­tal unit and return cash to shareholders.

Iron Moun­tain also said it’s set­ting up a com­mit­tee to explore con­ver­sion into a real estate invest­ment trust as part of an agree­ment with Elliott Man­age­ment. REITs must pass on at least 90 per­cent of their annual tax­able profit to share­hold­ers through dividends.

New York-based Elliott Man­age­ment, run by Paul Singer, has said it owns “slightly under” 5 per­cent of Iron Mountain’s stock.

As part of its agree­ment with Elliott Man­age­ment, Iron Moun­tain also agreed to nom­i­nate Allan Loren, one of the company’s four can­di­dates, to its board at the 2011 annual meet­ing, sched­uled for June 10. Elliott Man­age­ment agreed to with­draw its other nom­i­nees at the event, Iron Moun­tain said.
Under­ground Facility

Iron Moun­tain, founded in an under­ground facil­ity near Hud­son, New York, in 1951, stores and main­tains mate­ri­als for clients, includ­ing records, elec­tronic files, med­ical data and e-mail, accord­ing to its most recent annual report. It works with more than 150,000 cor­po­ra­tions in North Amer­ica, Europe, Latin Amer­ica and Asia Pacific.

The com­pany, which had $2.9 bil­lion of long-term debt as of Dec. 31, went pub­lic in 1996 and joined the S&P 500 Index (SPX) in Jan­u­ary 2009, accord­ing to the filing.

Iron Mountain’s $548 mil­lion of 8.375 per­cent bonds matur­ing in August 2021 also rose yes­ter­day after falling since April 14, Trace data show. The debt climbed 1.5 cents to 106 cents on the dol­lar to yield 7.5 per­cent, the data show.

Before yesterday’s call, S&P, which assigns Iron Moun­tain a BB– grade, changed its out­look on the com­pany to “neg­a­tive” from “sta­ble,” accord­ing to an April 19 note.
‘Finan­cial Risk’

“We expect the com­pany will have to raise new debt and draw under its revolv­ing credit facil­ity to finance the entire planned $2.2 bil­lion,” S&P ana­lysts Tulip Lim and Andy Liu wrote in the note. “The trans­ac­tion will raise finan­cial risk amid uncer­tainty as to financ­ing terms.”

The pay­outs could increase the company’s debt to earn­ings before inter­est, taxes, depre­ci­a­tion and amor­ti­za­tion to more than five times from the “low” four times area now, the ana­lysts wrote. A debt to EBITDA ratio above 5.5 times would spur a down­grade, they wrote.

“More lever­age makes bond­hold­ers increas­ingly uncom­fort­able,” said Andrew Wittmann, an ana­lyst at Robert W. Baird & Co. in Milwaukee.

The company’s tar­get lever­age of 3.5 times looks “about right,” said Wittman, who has a “neu­tral” rat­ing on the stock. “Share­hold­ers feel very com­fort­able there, and I feel like bond­hold­ers should feel pretty com­fort­able as well,” he said.
Credit Swaps

Credit-default swaps on Iron Mountain’s sub­or­di­nated bonds fell after soar­ing on April 19 to the high­est since Sep­tem­ber, accord­ing to data provider CMA. The con­tracts, which typ­i­cally rise as investor con­fi­dence wors­ens and fall as it improves, fell 7 basis points to 418.9 yes­ter­day, CMA data show.

Default swaps pay the buyer face value if a bor­rower fails to meet its oblig­a­tions, less the value of the defaulted debt. A basis point equals $1,000 annu­ally on a con­tract pro­tect­ing $10 mil­lion of debt.

“Some could even argue we’re under-levered,” Reese said on the con­fer­ence call. “We think we’re appro­pri­ately lev­ered at this space, given where the busi­ness is and given the amount of cap­i­tal we’re talk­ing about and we think this is the right thing to do. But this is not com­ing from a big lever­age up for the busi­ness at this stage.”

To con­tact the reporters respon­si­ble for this story: Sapna Mahesh­wari in New York at sapnam@bloomberg.net; Danielle Kucera in New York at wkoenig@bloomberg.net

To con­tact the edi­tors respon­si­ble for this story: Alan Gold­stein at agoldstein5@bloomberg.net Tom Giles at tgiles@bloomberg.net

Com­pli­ments of File­Man Research

Iron Mountain to Return Cash, May Sell Digital Assets

Posted on Apr 20, 2011 in Records Management News

Iron Moun­tain to Return Cash, May Sell Dig­i­tal Assets
By Danielle Kucera — Apr 20, 2011 9:45 AM CT

(Cor­rects story that ran April 19 to show Iron Moun­tain is con­sid­er­ing sell­ing only parts of its dig­i­tal business.)

Iron Moun­tain Inc. (IRM), the world’s largest doc­u­ment stor­age com­pany, said it will return cash to share­hold­ers and may sell parts of its dig­i­tal unit after pres­sure from hedge fund investor Elliott Man­age­ment Corp.

Iron Moun­tain also agreed to con­sider con­vert­ing to a real estate invest­ment trust, a move that Elliott encour­aged, Iron Moun­tain said in a state­ment today. One of Elliott’s nom­i­nees will join the Iron Moun­tain board, staving off a proxy fight in which the fund man­ager run by Paul Singer had sought four seats.

The New York-based hedge fund, which owns less than 5 per­cent of Iron Moun­tain, called for a review of the stor­age company’s strat­egy, oper­a­tions and cap­i­tal in a state­ment March 10, say­ing the company’s stock could more than dou­ble to $77 a share if it con­verted to a REIT and imple­mented its other proposals.

“Investors should be pleas­antly sur­prised that the return of cap­i­tal is quite sig­nif­i­cant,” said Andrew Wittmann, an ana­lyst at Robert W. Baird & Co. in Mil­wau­kee, who is neu­tral on the stock. “The 12-month plan is pretty aggres­sive, so they’re going to have to start pretty soon.”

The document-storage com­pany plans to return about $1.2 bil­lion to share­hold­ers dur­ing the next 12 months through stock repur­chases and div­i­dends and dis­trib­ute about $2.2 bil­lion through 2013, accord­ing to the state­ment. Iron Moun­tain took most of Elliott’s sug­ges­tions, Wittmann said.
Dig­i­tal Business

Iron Moun­tain, based in Boston, pro­vides busi­ness stor­age and main­tains doc­u­ments includ­ing records, elec­tronic files, med­ical data and e-mail. Iron Mountain’s effort to expand its inter­na­tional and dig­i­tal busi­nesses hasn’t been prof­itable enough, Elliott said in March.

Iron Moun­tain rose $1, or 3 per­cent, to $34.90 as of 4:15 p.m. in New York Stock Exchange com­pos­ite trad­ing. It has risen 33 per­cent since March 9, the day before Elliott called for a strate­gic review of the company.

“We strongly sup­port the board of direc­tors’ plan to increase stock­holder value with the actions announced today,” Ken Charles Fein­berg, co-portfolio man­ager at New York-based Davis Selected Advis­ers LLP, Iron Mountain’s largest investor as of March with a 21 per­cent share, said in the state­ment.
‘Strate­gic Alternatives’

Iron Mountain’s man­age­ment “con­cluded that the com­pany could not con­tinue invest­ing in tech­nol­ogy devel­op­ment and meet its return require­ments and that explor­ing strate­gic alter­na­tives for the dig­i­tal busi­ness was in the best inter­est of Iron Mountain’s stock­hold­ers,” accord­ing to the doc­u­ment– stor­age company’s state­ment. Options include a poten­tial sale of the company’s dig­i­tal archiv­ing and online backup services.

Less than two weeks after Elliott’s pro­posal, Iron Moun­tain adopted a so-called poison-pill pro­vi­sion, meant to keep investors from gain­ing con­trol of the com­pany. The share­holder– rights plan was a reac­tion to “extra­or­di­nary trad­ing activ­ity” in the company’s secu­ri­ties, said Stephen Golden, vice pres­i­dent of investor rela­tions at Iron Mountain.

Last week, Iron Moun­tain Chair­man Richard Reese took on the chief exec­u­tive offi­cer role after Bob Bren­nan stepped down as pres­i­dent and CEO.

As part of its pact with Elliott, Iron Moun­tain today agreed to nom­i­nate Allan Loren, one of Elliott’s can­di­dates, to its board of direc­tors at the 2011 annual meet­ing, sched­uled for June 10. Elliott agreed to with­draw its other nom­i­nees for the board at the event, Iron Moun­tain said.

Con­stan­tin R. Boden, a board mem­ber for more than 20 years, is retir­ing, accord­ing to the state­ment. The com­pany will work in tan­dem with Elliott and Davis Selected Advis­ers to fill the posi­tion with an inde­pen­dent can­di­date, Iron Moun­tain said.

Iron Mountain’s board plans to form a com­mit­tee, chaired by Reese, to eval­u­ate ways to max­i­mize value through alter­na­tive financ­ing, cap­i­tal and tax strate­gies and will make the analy­sis of a REIT con­ver­sion “first pri­or­ity,” the com­pany said.

J.P. Mor­gan Chase & Co. and Mor­gan Stan­ley (MS) are serv­ing as finan­cial advis­ers for Iron Moun­tain, and Weil, Got­shal & Manges LLP and Sul­li­van & Worces­ter LLP are serv­ing as legal advis­ers. Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Whar­ton & Gar­ri­son LLP is the legal adviser to Elliott.

To con­tact the reporter respon­si­ble for this story: Danielle Kucera at dkucera6@bloomberg.net

To con­tact the edi­tor respon­si­ble for this story: Tom Giles at tgiles5@bloomberg.net

Com­pli­ments of File­Man Research

Iron Mountain Inc Re-appoints Chairman Richard Reese as CEO

Posted on Apr 15, 2011 in Records Management News

UPDATE 3-Reese returns as Iron Moun­tain CEO; top share­holder lauds move
Iron Moun­tain Inc Re-appoints Chair­man Richard Reese as CEO
Thu Apr 14, 2011 4:13pm EDT

Bob Bren­nan steps down as CEO, resigns as direc­tor Davis Advi­sors expects co to exit dig­i­tal business

Shares up 5 pct at 3-yr high (Adds response from largest share­holder; com­pany background)

By Himank Sharma

BANGALORE, April 14 (Reuters) — Iron Moun­tain Inc’s move to bring back its chief exec­u­tive of three decades will likely help the doc­u­ment stor­age com­pany change its loss-making dig­i­tal busi­ness strat­egy, its largest share­holder said.

Tuscon-Arizona based money man­ager Davis Advis­ers, which holds over 21 per­cent of Iron Moun­tain, said the company’s board had con­sulted it before bring­ing back Richard Reese, fol­low­ing share­holder dis­sent over the company’s oper­a­tional spending.

“I’ve met Richard sev­eral times. They have taken a lot of feed­back, and the direc­tors have reached out to our pro­posal,” Ken Charles Fein­berg, co-portfolio man­ager of Davis Advis­ers told Reuters.

Last month, Davis had said it will sup­port hedge fund Elliott Management’s pro­posal to nom­i­nate a slate of four direc­tors to the company’s board. [ID:nL3E7EN31K]

Reese, 65, who has been the chair­man of the board since 1995, replaces Robert Bren­nan, who also resigned as a direc­tor of the company.

Investors cheered the appoint­ment of Reese, who was instru­men­tal in mak­ing Iron Moun­tain a dom­i­nant player in North Amer­i­can phys­i­cal stor­age. Under his lead­er­ship, the com­pany went pub­lic in 1996 and acquired local rivals later.

Iron Moun­tain shares rose 5 per­cent to a three-year high of $34.59 on Thurs­day on the New York Stock Exchange.

Iron Moun­tain began its dig­i­tal records busi­ness at the height of the dot-com boom, hop­ing to get busi­ness from large cor­po­ra­tions look­ing to store their email and instant mes­sage con­ver­sa­tions for future retrievals.

“The foray into dig­i­tal was a fail­ure, they invested $600–700 mil­lion to grow that busi­ness and they were barely earn­ing any money. In order to have a fresh set of eyes, the change was needed to be made,” Fein­berg said.

The com­pany had writ­ten off $283.8 mil­lion as impair­ment charges in fis­cal 2010 for its world­wide dig­i­tal busi­ness due to the sale of the domain name man­age­ment prod­uct line, accord­ing to its lat­est annual filing.

“The board was not hun­dred per­cent pleased with company’s response to the Elliott pro­posal and Reese will be a strong leader,” ana­lyst Edward Atorino at the Bench­mark Co said. (Report­ing by Himank Sharma and Rachana Khan­zode in Ban­ga­lore; Edit­ing by Prem Udayab­hanu, Vyas Mohan)

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/04/14/ironmountain-idUSL3E7FE20520110414

Com­pli­ments of FileMan

8 Reasons to Outsource Document Management

Posted on May 10, 2010 in Records Management News

8 Rea­sons to Out­source Doc­u­ment Management

Today’s guest post was a group effort by some of the folks at Iron Moun­tain. Iron Moun­tain is a world leader in infor­ma­tion man­age­ment ser­vices, assist­ing more than 140,000 orga­ni­za­tions in 39 coun­tries on five con­ti­nents with stor­ing, pro­tect­ing and man­ag­ing their infor­ma­tion. Iron Moun­tain cur­rently safe­guards and pro­vides access to more than 425 mil­lion cubic feet of paper records, 10 bil­lion emails, 65 mil­lion com­puter backup tapes, 2.5 mil­lion PCs and 20,000 servers.

Iron Moun­tain was a spon­sor of our Spring ECM sem­i­nar series; this was the topic they addressed in the sem­i­nars. Reg­is­tra­tion is already open for the Fall Series:

Sep 14 2010 Atlanta, GA
Sep 16 2010 Wash­ing­ton, DC
Sep 22 2010 Toronto, ON
Sep 28 2010 Boston, MA
Sep 30 2010 New York, NY
Oct 5 2010 Min­neapo­lis, MN
Oct 7 2010 Chicago, IL

8 Rea­sons to Out­source Doc­u­ment Management

When con­fronted with infor­ma­tion man­age­ment chal­lenges, many orga­ni­za­tions oper­ate on a reac­tive basis—developing ad hoc solu­tions to spe­cific prob­lems as they arise. And because of this, many doc­u­ment man­age­ment pro­grams are rife with dupli­cate capa­bil­i­ties, non-standard approaches and process inef­fi­cien­cies. The result is that com­pa­nies are becom­ing exposed to unnec­es­sary risks and costs and miss­ing out on oppor­tu­ni­ties to add busi­ness value.

It’s time to take a step back and view infor­ma­tion man­age­ment as a crit­i­cal process on par with more tra­di­tional busi­ness oper­a­tions. But few orga­ni­za­tions have the time or exper­tise to build an infor­ma­tion man­age­ment pro­gram that meets today’s needs—and will be ready for what­ever the future holds.

That’s where work­ing with a knowl­edge­able part­ner and lever­ag­ing a hosted solu­tion can make a all the dif­fer­ence. They can help you quickly reach a new level of infor­ma­tion man­age­ment capa­bil­ity with­out a major up-front invest­ment in soft­ware, hard­ware and in-house skills.

Here are our top eight tips for get­ting your infor­ma­tion man­age­ment strat­egy and pro­gram back on track through the use of out­sourc­ing and hosted solutions.

1 — Avoid mak­ing a “plat­form deci­sion” at all.

The invest­ment in procur­ing and oper­at­ing a mod­ern, enterprise-class doc­u­ment man­age­ment sys­tem is significant—and many solu­tions offer high-end fea­tures, such as work­flow, that few small and mid-size busi­nesses need.

Hosted doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tions offer a usage-based cost model that allows you to pay only for the ser­vices you need and the vol­ume you process. What’s more, since your part­ner is respon­si­ble for hard­ware and soft­ware upgrades and that cost is pro­rated across all orga­ni­za­tions using the ser­vice, you gain access to the lat­est and great­est with­out hav­ing to spend your lim­ited cap­i­tal funds.

2 — Get an expert to tame the paper monster.

The aver­age busi­ness pro­duces a mas­sive vol­ume of doc­u­ments, which makes locat­ing and retriev­ing vital records in a timely fash­ion a chal­lenge. In addi­tion, files are fre­quently orga­nized by non-standard index­ing schemes that do not sup­port enterprise-wide dis­cov­ery efforts.

A sin­gle source sup­plier for doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tions can help limit oper­a­tional and legal risks by holis­ti­cally man­ag­ing an organization’s infor­ma­tion assets. With doc­u­ment man­age­ment as their core busi­ness, these part­ners have seen and done it all—developing best prac­tices and exper­tise based on hun­dreds of cus­tomer engagements.

3 — Don’t wait to collaborate.

IDC esti­mates that the typ­i­cal enter­prise with 1,000 knowl­edge work­ers wastes $2.5 to $3.5 mil­lion per year search­ing for nonex­is­tent infor­ma­tion, fail­ing to find exist­ing infor­ma­tion or recre­at­ing infor­ma­tion that can’t be found. These esti­mates are sup­ported by other research that shows that pro­fes­sion­als spend 5 to 15 per­cent of their time read­ing infor­ma­tion, and up to 50 per­cent look­ing for it.

Hosted doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tions can be up and run­ning in a mat­ter of weeks, com­pared to the months it takes to eval­u­ate, pro­cure and install an in-house solu­tion. This speeds time to value, accel­er­ates deci­sion mak­ing and increases pro­duc­tiv­ity thanks to easy access to the infor­ma­tion work­ers need to do their jobs.

4 — Chain of cus­tody matters.

Main­tain­ing a strong chain of cus­tody for doc­u­ments is essen­tial to min­i­miz­ing busi­ness risk. With in-house doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tions, phys­i­cal records are often moved from off­site stor­age facil­i­ties to be scanned at another loca­tion and then returned for re-filing. Every step intro­duces an oppor­tu­nity for lost and improp­erly filed documents.

By choos­ing a sin­gle source provider for records stor­age and doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tions, chain of cus­tody risks are mit­i­gated. Phys­i­cal doc­u­ments can be retrieved, scanned and re-filed in a sin­gle loca­tion, so that the paper file never leaves the secu­rity of the vendor’s facil­ity. In addi­tion, document-level audit trails are main­tained, which can be extremely valu­able should your orga­ni­za­tion be required to pro­duce doc­u­ment his­to­ries as part of legal or reg­u­la­tory actions.

5 — Hybrid solu­tions “fuel” process efficiency.

Man­ag­ing doc­u­ments with unstruc­tured con­tent and in non-standard for­mats requires a level of cross-process coor­di­na­tion that con­sumes more busi­ness and infor­ma­tion tech­nol­ogy resources than most orga­ni­za­tions real­ize. With doc­u­ments stored in paper file cab­i­nets, record stor­age boxes in dis­trib­uted loca­tions or elec­tronic files in mul­ti­ple appli­ca­tions, this untamed stor­age envi­ron­ment makes rapid infor­ma­tion access a challenge.

A hybrid doc­u­ment man­age­ment solu­tion com­bines the cost-effectiveness of tra­di­tional paper stor­age for the bulk of your records, with the speed, con­ve­nience and cost-savings of dig­i­tal access. Files are kept in paper for­mat, but scanned and dig­i­tized on demand accord­ing to busi­ness needs. Only a single-source provider that offers phys­i­cal records stor­age and out­sourced doc­u­ment man­age­ment can offer the effi­ciency of this hybrid model.

6 — Arm knowl­edge work­ers with self-service tools.

In today’s find-it-yourself, search-engine-enabled world, employ­ees demand self-service doc­u­ment access and man­age­ment tools. As a result, the doc­u­ment man­age­ment specialist’s role has changed from records gate­keeper to an infor­ma­tion access coach or mentor.

As such, it’s impor­tant that dig­i­tal file access and man­age­ment be put in the hands of the end users—the peo­ple who know the doc­u­ments, their busi­ness uses and access require­ments. A hosted doc­u­ment man­age­ment sys­tem must sup­port this need, with intel­li­gent scan­ning and image cap­ture fea­tures sup­ported by a dig­i­ti­za­tion process that addresses the require­ments for each doc­u­ment type. And as doc­u­ments are imaged, they should be made avail­able per your spe­cific requirements—via an FTP site, in an ECM-ready form or via a hosted repository.

7 — Cre­ate a plan that reflects best practices.

Few orga­ni­za­tions have the resources or exper­tise to create/overhaul their infor­ma­tion man­age­ment strat­egy and/or solu­tions. And with busi­nesses chal­lenged to do more with less, this com­plex task fre­quently falls to the bot­tom of the to-do list.

When out­sourced experts take care of doc­u­ment man­age­ment needs, com­pa­nies can rest easy know­ing that con­ver­sion process, reten­tion sched­ule, infor­ma­tion secu­rity and pri­vacy best prac­tices are being main­tained and con­sis­tently fol­lowed. This approach, with appro­pri­ate over­sight on your part, reduces the risk of com­pli­ance vio­la­tions and asso­ci­ated costs.

8 — Change doesn’t have to be difficult.

Chang­ing infor­ma­tion man­age­ment strat­egy and processes can be eas­ier than you imag­ine. An expe­ri­enced records man­age­ment part­ner, with years of multi-industry expe­ri­ence, can typ­i­cally address the com­plex­i­ties of a com­pre­hen­sive records man­age­ment strat­egy more effec­tively and cost-efficiently than your orga­ni­za­tion. And, at the same time, pro­vide a holis­tic solu­tion that will return sig­nif­i­cant addi­tional value because the com­po­nent pieces are capa­ble of work­ing together in a seam­less fash­ion while remov­ing any dupli­ca­tion of effort.

http://aiim.typepad.com/aiim_blog/2010/05/8-reasons-to-outsource-document-managementwhen-confronted-with-information-management-challenges-many-organizations-operate.html

Com­pli­ments of File­Man Research