Digital file organization - Part 2

Last week I talked about Digital File Organization, and suggested that you use folders and sub-folders that mirror the paper based system you are currently using.  Now let's talk about digital file-naming conventions. 

First, if you work in a big law firm or company you probably have a document management system, or DMS.  And,if you do, then that system will provide file names and will keep track of the file locations.  All you have to do is 'profile' the document, which means fill out some key information such as the client name and number and the matter number (and perhaps some other information too).  If you work with a DMS then you are constrained to use its system, and that's fine. 

If you aren't using a DMS then you have to name your electronic files.  I suggest you follow this convention: start with the four digit year, then underscore, then two digit month, then underscore, then two digit date.  Like this: 2007_04_16.

Then follow that up with a space and then some brief description of the document (e.g. 2007_04_16 Letter to President Bush abt Iraq War).  The reason to use this format is that it will automatically sort the documents chronologically in whatever folder you place them.  This is especially good for documents in a correspondence folder since you generally want your correspondence to be organized chronologically (or in reverse chronological order).  If the correspondence folder gets to jammed up then simply use the Acrobat feature that lets you combine multiple files into one PDF.  When you do this you will find that in the resulting PDF all of the individual files have been bookmarked so you know where each separate document is.  I recommend combining correspondence into PDFs by year, but that's up to you.

This is a simple system, but therein lies its power. Obviously a full-fledged DMS system is necessary for firms of a certain size.  But I also think that most firms that have DMS systems don't really make full use of their power.  And yet they are stuck with a system that requires regular upgrades, and which must at all times be compatible with the current computer operating system and word processing document programs.  The advantage of the system I describe is that it doesn't create any compatibility issues because it uses the native organizing method of your computer operating system.

Sometimes simpler and smaller is better.  But, whatever system you decide to use, think hard about what you are trying to accomplish and how to best accomplish it.  Have a plan and stick to it, but don't be afraid to change it if you aren't getting optimum results.

P.S. in the example above with the date, you could also make the date 2007-04-16 (which uses dashes instead of underscoring). That's fine.  But don't do some documents with underscoring and some with dashes because the computer will treat them a bit differently and you won't get true chronological sorting.  In other words, be consistent.

Comments

[Tom Stirewalt]

. I sorta agree with the date format.
. Suggest you leave out the dash and/or underscore UNLESS your scanning autoname choices force you to produce scans with the dash or underscore (too much trouble to delete them).
. Suggest format yyyymmdd as the first 8 characters of your filename. Fewer keystrokes, less to remember (which is it, - or _ ?).
. Also means when you bury something way way down in the heirarchy, you have a couple of less characters to worry about with filename LENGTH.
.
. I am running into filename length errors when I archive my customers' stuff to CD/DVD and sometimes to external hard drives.
. I generally do not run into this with 'live' data because the user will get an error immediately. Backups because typically the backup is put in ANOTHER folder called something like "BkUp-16april2007" or "20070417-BkUp" which kicks the number of characters over the limit.
. 17 April 2007

[Jonathan Franklin]

I have enjoyed your posting on this topic. Our office went nearly full digital several years ago. A key component to it was having a high-speed scanner. A second, was leveraging a case management system, which had a built-in DMS.

In our experience, we have found the DMS to be a more effective system for file maintenance than the traditional folder directory system. I first implemented the folder system at a prior firm in 1994, and it worked well until we obtained Time Matters, which is a case management program. Now I firmly believe EVERY attorney - no matter what their firm size is - should have a case management system. Further, I find the DMS in TM to be quite intuitive and easy to use. I also like being able to quickly see every file. In reflecting on this, I do not see the down sides you reference to the DMS. But I appreciate your points. So, for whatever it is worth, I think people should really look into a top notch case management program, which should have a built in DMS. I agree that most people don't fully leverage their software programs, and that can lead to frustration - good training is key! In our office, I'd estimate that we likely use ~60% of Time Matters capabilities, but it has taken us 5 years to get to that level. Any good software requires effort!

Thanks for everyone's time in reading this comment.

[Greg Birdsong]

Great post! Remember, you can make your file naming convention as simple or elegant as people are willing to support. For example, you could follow the date code with a document code (eg. MT/MF - Memo to/from; LT/LF - Letter to/from, etc.). I also suggest a simpler 6-digit date code: yymmdd. Quick and easy! So a typical file name might be "070326 LT Johnson re settlement.doc" Alternatively, I've known attorneys who begin file names with the document code and use the date code for time sorting.