Overall Satisfaction with FileHold
FileHold was being used in my organization in order to electronically store all of our documents. FileHold also allowed me to submit sourcing documents for approval to my managers and keep track of the approval process. It was only the purchasing department that used FileHold, and I believe it would have been a lot more useful if other departments implemented the use of FileHold. However, some departments that tried using it, did not necessarily like it, but that might be because of lack of training, or them failing to see the big picture of the use in the organization as a whole.
- Keep track of approval process once a document is submitted for approval
- Allowed me to run reports on the amount of documents approved the first time through, second time through etc.
- Allowed tracking of documents.
- Whenever there was an update done to the program, we would run into multiple issues.
- Faster approval process
- Better relationships with our plant [locations]
- Improved employee efficiency by making the approval process faster
- Improved employee efficiency by allowing employees to find documents faster through the search function
I find FileHold more useful than SAP at times. It is easier to use, you do not need transaction codes. Both programs allow you to run reports. I am not sure if SAP could be compared with FileHold due to the fact that I use SAP to get approval and funding on tooling contracts. However, in FileHold, all you get is an approval from your supervisors. If all the departments would use FileHold, it would be more efficient and effective.
FileHold is well suited because it reduces the paper use for approvals. It also allows the managers to track the time employees spend sending files for approval and how many times it takes them to get the approval. FileHold is less appropriate when the approvers of a document are out of office and they did not set up a backup approver.