You are viewing limited content. For full access, please sign in.

Question

Question

Automated records management reporting

asked on August 30, 2015

I'm in the process of implementing RME for a client. I want to include a workflow that will run on the first day of each quarter of the year. The workflow will automatically send a report of all records eligible for disposition during that quarter. Please see the attached screenshot of the workflow I have built up to this point. I create a token to extract the current year, then run a search for all records eligible for disposition (accession & destruction) during the upcoming quarter.

I want to send those search results to the Records Manager in an email via document links. How do I attach all those links to the email. I'm thinking I need a For Each Entry activity to iterate through all the search results, but if I include the email activity in the For Each Entry, it's going to send an email for each search result. How do I send just one email with all the links attached?

Records management reporting workflow.PNG
Current year token.PNG
Records search.PNG
0 0

Answer

SELECTED ANSWER
replied on September 1, 2015

That would work.

I think the Web Access solution would've been more elegant since the user would get the most up to date results. If they prefer to use the Client, then maybe make a folder called "Report - Eligible for Cutoff - Start Date to End Date", put shortcuts for the search results in it and email the link to the folder. That way the user stays in LF and everything is accessible without the hassle of looking at the Excel spreadsheet and then finding documents.

You shouldn't need the branches if you use a scheduled Workflow that starts every 3 months (ie, at the beginning of the quarter). You can use the current date and subtract 3 months to get the other end of the quarter and use the values in the search.

1 0

Replies

replied on August 31, 2015

Is Web Access an option? You could send a link to the search in Web Access.

Workflow does not currently have a way to add multiple document links in Email (due to the possibility of a large number or search results).

1 0
replied on September 6, 2016

Hi Connie,

I see that you still have the '%(Current Year)' token in your search query. That token is only available in WF, not Client, where you're running this search. In Client, you would have to replace the words '%(Current Year)' with a real year, like '2016'.

1 0
replied on August 30, 2015

Additionally, if there is a better way to do this type of automated RM reporting, please let me know, I'm all ears.

0 0
replied on September 1, 2015

I see. The customer does have Web Access but they don't use it because they can't use single sign-on due to some Kerberos issue they had involving the SharePoint Integration. Not sure of the exact details regarding that.

We are also working on an SDK Script activity that produces an Excel file with the list contents of the search. If we get that script to work, we'll just email that Excel file. Do you foresee any issues with that concept?

0 0
SELECTED ANSWER
replied on September 1, 2015

That would work.

I think the Web Access solution would've been more elegant since the user would get the most up to date results. If they prefer to use the Client, then maybe make a folder called "Report - Eligible for Cutoff - Start Date to End Date", put shortcuts for the search results in it and email the link to the folder. That way the user stays in LF and everything is accessible without the hassle of looking at the Excel spreadsheet and then finding documents.

You shouldn't need the branches if you use a scheduled Workflow that starts every 3 months (ie, at the beginning of the quarter). You can use the current date and subtract 3 months to get the other end of the quarter and use the values in the search.

1 0
replied on September 2, 2015

Yeah, I agree that the WA solution would be the most elegant one, but they just don't use it here for whatever reason.

We'll try getting that Excel script to work, I think the Records Manager would actually prefer it that way. If not, I'm just going to recommend running the search manually.

Thanks for you help! Have a great day.

0 0
replied on September 2, 2016

How did you come up with your Records Search? 

I typed out exactly what you have above and I get this error message:

And if I try to duplicate it in Web Access 10, all I can get is this:

0 0
replied on September 6, 2016

Hi Connie,

The client chose to run records searches manually, so we never implemented the monthly reporting solution.

One tip I can give is to first run the search in Client to make sure it works properly, then copy/paste the advanced search syntax into the WF activity. If the search doesn't work in Client, then attend a CFW to troubleshoot.

Hope that helps.

replied on March 19, 2019

Nareg, I have a customer that is asking for the same type of "review before destroy" step that you explained above.  How did you handle the process of approval for the accession/destroy step?  When you emailed the link to the "review" folder, how did the end user respond for approve/deny for each document? Have you added any other features to the report process since starting in Aug-2015?  Thanks!

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Bruce, I would also love to hear from Nareg to see what he's done.  For my own processes, I chose to have my workflow put the records "shortcuts" into a temporary holding folder instead of emailing them to people, folders set up per department for our staff to review and approve for destruction via moving the shortcuts into folders that indicate their desire for each of the records they need to review.  Another workflow records who dropped any into the Approved for Destruction folder (this is the first level approval).  Once they have completed sorting and making decisions, the names of those dropped into the destruction folder get exported onto an Excel spreadsheet "Destruction Certificate" which gets signed by the department head and the CAO, which then gets scanned back into Laserfiche as our final record of destruction.

I just threw a few shortcuts into a blank folder here as examples to show you a bit of the sorting they can do.  Most of the columns that will be used to check metadata (as shown above) are newly developed procedures so most of the older documents (shortcuts) that will come into these folders will not include anything in these columns, but in future years these columns will give great clues as to what may be deleted or what needs to be checked out further (our repository is only five years old).  I find it's the event based retentions that most often were ending up in retention folders too soon.  I have added my summary of the tools I've set up for event based retention controls, as well, in case that is helpful.

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Connie, great info!  We're planning on using the search then create shortcuts to review folders/records by Dept. also.  Your documentation is very helpful - I'll look at everything closely, and respond back with questions.  Thanks for jumping into the discussion!

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Connie, 

Reference your document “Destruction Procedures” on page 1, “The folder, ‘Approved for Destruction’ is monitored by another workflow that will record who approved them for destruction”.  Question: Where are you putting that approved-by info?

On page two of same doc, 1a. “When the workflow runs to find all the records ready for destruction, it will now add the field called ‘Original File Path’…   How are you adding a field to a closed record template? 

Same question under 2a. “This workflow will add the ‘Disposition Choice’ field to the entries…”  How are you adding a field to the entries/records?

Thanks!

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019 Show version history

1) A workflow is monitoring this folder and adds the User name to an Approved by field that users are not allowed to modify.

2) The Original File Path is recorded by the workflow that does my mass archive on Dec 31st each year.  (See attached document that outlines what my retention and "archive" workflows do and what I mean by "archive".)

3) The Disposition Choice is another workflow monitoring these folders.

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019 Show version history

Also, Bruce, you asked about adding fields to a closed record. 

In your question on 1a, at that point the records are not locked down by the retention folders yet. 

In your question on 2a, good point!  That is a brand new WF that obviously hasn't been tested enough yet because the records that will eventually go through this whole process will be locked down and cannot be added to.  Rats!  I'll have to rethink that one.  We are only just this year having documents start to come to the end of their life cycle this January and I have not had our staff complete their very first, 1st level approval procedures yet.  I was hoping it would help me more quickly sort through the documents in the retention folders for the ones I want to remove.

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Ah, rats, after a second look, both of those stages (1a and 2a) are locked down stages.  I will have to rethink those both!

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Connie, see PRD147 page 10 from Justin Pava.  Talking about upcoming 10.4.1 (soon...!)Here:https://support.laserfiche.com/resources/3998/prd147-simplify-compliance-with-new-flexible-records-management

With 10.4.1, we'll be able to modify fields AFTER records are cutoff.  Opens up a lot of possibilities.  Then you'll be able to do what you describe above.  In the meantime, I'm working on a customer demo to show the approval-before-destruction step, and it's going to need to be mostly manual.  Maybe somebody with another perspective on a solution will add here (Miruna...??)  I appreciate your good documentation and useful concepts I can incorporate in my solution! Thanks!

1 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Ah, yes, thanks Bruce.  I was also about to mention that it will work if I unlock the targeted folders first.  I'm going to have to unlock them anyways in order to move some of them out for longer retention!

Also, did you know that Version 10.4 can set retention on documents right in their normal folders?  My understanding is that they won't have to be moved to Record Series folders in the future.  I'm happy about that, however, all the work I've done to figure out how to get to where I am today will all be for nothing after that!  :)

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

Yes - "Flexible Records Management"!  All 3 of the RM CPP courses are now obsolete regarding folder structure instructions. 

Could you explain what you mean by "unlock the targeted folders first"? Thanks!

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

The CPP courses (lol) yes!

Sorry, the correct terminology is "Uncutoff".  I've had to do this numerous times when someone wants to add pages to a record because there has been addition information on the topic of the entry.  

0 0
replied on March 20, 2019

I looked at the WF "Set Records Management Properties" and don't see a way to uncutoff using a workflow routine.  Wondering if there's a way that once the docs ready for Destruction are sent to the Dept. Approval folders then they could all be uncutoff so the template fields would be available for use during the approval process?  Not looking possible.  Would be a pain to do without automation. 

0 0
replied on March 21, 2019

That would be good if it could be done.  I was thinking I would have to do it manually.  

0 0
You are not allowed to follow up in this post.

Sign in to reply to this post.