Home · Solutions · Management & planning

Solution · Management & planning

Twenty years of network drives become a searchable archive with retention that runs itself

The document archive that files itself

Every document is classified, given metadata and a retention label as it lands, and people only rule on what the models cannot place.

DepartmentalMicrosoft TeamsHuman in the loopAI where it earns its place
38,000documents a month are named and filed by hand in this illustrative insurer, and none of them arrives with metadata anyone can search.

Executive summary

Challenge

Your documents sit on a network drive with no metadata, under retention rules nobody applies.

What changes

The target is designed before anything moves, because the failure mode of every archive project is copying the folder tree into SharePoint and…

Business value

Filing stops being a task: a document arriving today is classified, described and placed within minutes.

Systems involved

SharePoint libraries with content types and metadata; Microsoft Purview retention labels and records; the migration manifest and reconciliation report

Business problem

Document management

The drive grew the way every drive grows. Each department built its own folder tree, the naming convention changed every few years, and important documents ended up in several places at once: the file server, the policy system, a handler's mailbox, someone's OneDrive. None of those copies knows about the others.

The people who feel it rarely filed the documents. A claims handler needs the original terms, a lawyer the signed version rather than the draft, an underwriter what the broker agreed. Each starts by asking a person instead of a system, and when that person retires the folder map goes too.

Retention exists on paper. The policy names periods for policy documents, claims files and personnel records, and the folder called "to delete" has never been emptied. Everything kept is in scope when an access request or an audit arrives, and personal data held past its purpose sits badly against the GDPR storage limitation principle. Modern search needs exactly what the drive lacks: correct permissions, a document type, one operative version.

How it works today

This is what we usually find before a migration.

  1. PersonA document arrives by email, from the mailroom scanner or as a system export; someone saves it to the drive and renames it in whichever convention the department uses this year
  2. WaitingNothing is indexed beyond the file name, so it is findable only by whoever filed it
  3. PersonRetrieval requests travel as Teams messages to whoever might remember the case
  4. Risk of errorThe same contract exists in three versions and nobody can prove which was signed
  5. Risk of errorRetention lives in a policy document, no folder is emptied, and expired records sit beside records under legal hold
  6. WaitingAudit and access requests take days of manual searching and are never provably complete
PersonWaitingRisk of error

Why the current process costs more than it appears

The most expensive part of this process has no cost line.

  • Filing looks like a thirty-second task, but it carries the decision of where the document belongs and whether a copy exists, repeated tens of thousands of times a month.
  • Retrieval is the larger cost and the invisible one: a handler who cannot find a document asks the broker to resend it or works without it.
  • Duplicates add ambiguity rather than only storage, because three copies of an annex surface during a dispute rather than during a clean-up.
  • Over-retention turns closed business into live exposure, and knowledge of the folder structure stays personal, so answering a question about 2011 depends on two people being available.

Cost of inaction

Twelve months of hand-filing at today's intake≈ €638,400
Thirty-six months of the same filing habit≈ €1,915,200
The legacy pool, if 6,000,000 files were ever read by hand≈ €1,400,000

Every month of intake adds to a pile nobody is reading; the first two rows only run that model forward. The third is a scale, not a plan: 6,000,000 files at half a minute each is 50,000 hours of reading, roughly €1,400,000 at the same hourly cost. Nobody funds a manual sort of twenty years of files, which is why the drive is never cleaned.

What accumulates meanwhile is more than cost. Every year without applied retention adds another year of records that should have been destroyed, and every retirement removes part of the folder map. The inconvenience becomes an exposure at the first request that demands a complete answer.

Illustrative scenario

A plausible organisation with realistic proportions. The figures are there to be recalculated on your data; they are not a client result.

Organisation

An insurance and financial services group in Central Europe, 1,900 employees, Microsoft 365 in daily use, a policy system, a claims system and roughly 40 TB on two file servers.

Volume

38,000 new documents a month by email, mailroom scanner and system export, behind them some 6 million legacy files from twenty years of trading.

Current process

Each document is opened, judged, renamed and saved by hand, about three minutes once the decision of where it belongs is counted. Retrieval runs on memory.

Bottleneck

Nothing carries metadata, so nothing is findable except by whoever filed it, and nothing can be disposed of because nobody can state what a file is.

Solution

Robots crawl and deduplicate the drives, document processing for Microsoft 365 classifies the born-digital files and UiPath Document Understanding the legacy scans, every document lands in a designed SharePoint library with metadata and a Microsoft Purview retention label, and records owners clear exceptions in Microsoft Teams.

Potential outcome

Three minutes per document become seconds for the classified majority, retrieval becomes a metadata search, and retention stops being an intention. The figures are a model, not a measurement.

Proposed solution

The target is designed before anything moves, because the failure mode of every archive project is copying the folder tree into SharePoint and calling that a migration. The architecture is a few sites by business domain, libraries with content types the business recognises, and columns people actually search on: counterparty, policy or claim number, document type, effective date, records class.

Born-digital files are classified and described inside SharePoint by document processing for Microsoft 365, which supplies prebuilt and custom models plus autofill columns that write metadata from the document itself, consumed pay-as-you-go. Legacy scans need a different engine: UiPath Document Understanding handles what a 2008 fax looks like after two photocopies. Robots log every file with its hash, collapse exact duplicates, and group near-duplicates by type and number so one version survives as operative and the rest are linked as superseded.

Retention is applied as the document is filed. Each library and content type carries a default retention label, Microsoft Purview auto-apply policies cover what location alone cannot decide, and disposition review goes to a named records owner. People appear only where judgement is required: what the models cannot place, version conflicts and misplaced personal data become tasks in Microsoft Teams, and new arrivals from the scanner library and the shared mailbox run the same rules.

Native capabilities used

SharePoint libraries, content types and metadata columns; document processing for Microsoft 365 (prebuilt and custom models, autofill columns, OCR); UiPath Document Understanding with Validation Station; Microsoft Purview retention labels, records and disposition review; UiPath Orchestrator queues and audit; UiPath Action Center tasks in Microsoft Teams

What we build

The information architecture; the mapping from document type to records class and label; the duplicate and version logic; the migration engine with manifest and reconciliation report; the exception queues, intake rules and dashboard

Custom integration

Lookups against the policy and claims systems to confirm a number read from a document exists; read-only SMB access to the file servers

How the automated process works

  1. AutomationRobots crawl the file servers, log every file with hash, path and dates, and queue it in UiPath Orchestrator
  2. AutomationExact duplicates collapse to one item; near-duplicates of the same type and number are ranked by date, signature and completeness
  3. AutomationBorn-digital files are classified by document processing for Microsoft 365, which fills the library columns; scans go to UiPath Document Understanding
  4. SystemNumbers read from the document are checked against the core systems, and one that does not exist is held rather than filed
  5. AutomationConfident items are written to the right library with content type, metadata and retention label, superseded copies linked to the survivor
  6. PersonLow-confidence classifications, version conflicts and misplaced personal data reach the records owner in Microsoft Teams
  7. AutomationNew documents on the scanner library or in the shared mailbox run the same rules the day they land, and a weekly report shows what moved and what waits
AutomationSystemPerson

Human-in-the-loop model

Automation handles

  • Crawling, hashing, deduplication and the migration manifest for every file
  • Classification, extraction and column filling for born-digital documents and legacy scans
  • Writing each document to its library with content type, retention label and links to superseded copies
  • Ongoing intake from the scanner library and the shared mailbox under the same rules

People decide

  • Documents the models could not place, ruled on in Teams with the file in front of the records owner
  • Which of two conflicting versions is operative, when signature and date do not settle it
  • Disposition at the end of a retention period, reviewed rather than executed silently
  • Records classes and retention periods, which stay owned by compliance

Before and after

BeforeAfter
Filing effort per documentabout 3 minseconds for classified items
Finding a document from 2014hours or days, if someone remembersa metadata search anyone can run
Versions of one contractthree copies, none authoritativeone operative version, the rest linked
Retentiona policy nobody appliesa label on every record, disposition reviewed

Systems and integrations

We do not add technology to make an architecture look serious. Every element below has a specific job in this process.

Inputs

  • legacy file servers over SMB
  • scanner library on SharePoint
  • shared mailbox in Exchange Online
  • exports from the policy and claims systems

Automation layer

  • UiPath Orchestrator
  • UiPath Robots
  • UiPath Document Understanding
  • document processing for Microsoft 365
  • Power Automate

Target systems

  • SharePoint libraries with content types and metadata
  • Microsoft Purview retention labels and records
  • the migration manifest and reconciliation report

Human touchpoints: UiPath Action Center tasks in Microsoft Teams; disposition review in Microsoft Purview; the archive dashboard in a Teams channel

legacy file servers over SMBUiPath OrchestratorUiPath RobotsSharePoint libraries with content typesUiPath Action Center tasks in Microsoft Teams

Technologies used

Microsoft SharePoint (libraries, content types, metadata columns)

the target archive: structure, metadata, versioning, permissions

A
document processing for Microsoft 365 (prebuilt and custom models, autofill columns, OCR)

classifies born-digital files and fills library columns, pay-as-you-go

A
UiPath Document Understanding (IXP)

OCR, classification and extraction for twenty years of scans, with Validation Station

A
UiPath Robots + Orchestrator

crawl the servers, hash and deduplicate, queue every file, retry and audit

A
Microsoft Purview (retention labels, records, disposition review)

applies and enforces retention; auto-apply and records sit in the Microsoft 365 E5 range

A
UiPath Action Center in Microsoft Teams

records owners clear exceptions without leaving Teams

A
Power Automate

watches the scanner library and the shared mailbox and starts intake

A
Microsoft 365 Copilot

answers questions from the archive inside each user's permissions, where licensed

A
Averified product capability (vendor documentation)

Illustrative economic model

What it is worth, with the arithmetic shown.

Illustrative model
38,000 documents a month × 3 minutes of filing and naming= 1,900 h / month
1,900 h × €28 fully loaded hourly cost= €53,200 / month
× 12 months≈ €638,400 / year
Annual filing effort released (illustrative)≈ €638,400

Three minutes covers the whole filing act: opening the document, deciding where it belongs, renaming and saving it, and checking for an existing copy; it is a typical range for this scenario, not a measurement at a client. €28 is a fully loaded back-office hourly cost in Central Europe. The model covers ongoing intake only and shows capacity released rather than headcount removed; the legacy pool is handled in the next section.

Run the numbers on your data

hours released per month
of annual capacity released

An illustrative estimate from your own inputs. It models released capacity; it is not a promise of savings.

Business benefits

  • Filing stops being a task: a document arriving today is classified, described and placed within minutes
  • Retrieval changes shape, from a message to a colleague on holiday to a search on counterparty, number and type
  • One operative version per document, superseded copies linked, so an argument about which annex applies is settled from the record
  • Retention becomes something the system does rather than something the policy says, and audit or access requests are answered from metadata in hours
  • Content becomes fit for modern search and, where Microsoft 365 Copilot is licensed, fit to be asked questions

The management view

  • Compliance can show an auditor a file plan, the labels applied and a disposition log, rather than an intention
  • Twenty years of institutional memory stops depending on which two employees are still with the company
  • Storage and backup spend becomes a decision instead of a habit, because what is kept has a reason to be kept
  • Anything built later on the company's own content starts from classified material rather than another clean-up

Board-level KPIs

share of documents filed with complete metadatamedian retrieval timeduplicate rate in the archiveshare of records carrying a retention labelexception rate at intake

Security and governance

An auditor should be able to reconstruct every decision.

  • The migration account reads the file servers and never writes to them; each completed source area goes read-only, so afterwards one place holds the document
  • Documents stay in your Microsoft 365 tenant; the UiPath side runs in the Automation Cloud EU region and receives only the pages needed for classification
  • Permissions are rebuilt rather than copied: twenty years of ad-hoc shares become library access driven by groups in Microsoft Entra ID
  • Classification models are versioned, tested against a held-back sample and reviewed with compliance whenever a threshold or class mapping changes
  • Legal holds are applied before migration starts and outrank every label; each disposition decision is recorded in Microsoft Purview

Why now

01

The file servers are heading for a decision anyway: a hardware refresh, a version leaving support, a storage renewal. Migrating with classification costs little more than migrating the mess unchanged

02

Retention that exists only on paper is the first thing a regulator asks about, and no access request accepts "we would have to search the drives" as an answer

03

Prebuilt and custom document models now run inside SharePoint, and document understanding reads scans plain OCR cannot. Meanwhile the modelled €53,200 a month of filing effort continues either way

Relevant executive roles

COO

Retrieval stops being a personal favour; a question about a 2014 file is answered without knowing who filed it

Chief Compliance Officer

Retention becomes demonstrable: a file plan, labels on real records, disposition reviewed and logged

CIO

Two file servers with their backup bill, permissions debt and migration risk stop moving from roadmap to roadmap

CFO

Twenty years of storage and the filing effort behind it become a measured cost with an owner

Common questions and objections

Our old scans are unreadable even for a person.

Some are, and those go to a person rather than being guessed at. Most fail only for plain text search: a document model reads a stamped, skewed fax well enough to classify it and pull the policy number, and the confidence score names the ones it could not.

We cannot agree retention periods, which is why the policy is not applied.

Then the archive is built first and the periods follow. Once you can see how many documents of each class you hold and how old they are, agreeing a period stops being abstract.

Will this not simply move the mess into SharePoint?

Not if the folder tree is never copied. Documents go into a designed structure, whatever cannot be placed waits for a person, and the reconciliation report shows what went where.

When this is not the right solution

  • A few thousand documents a month and a drive small enough for a team to sort in weeks, where a disciplined manual clean-up costs less
  • No owner for records classes and retention periods; without a compliance decision the automation has nothing to apply
  • Content about to be replaced anyway, such as a policy system migration that will reissue the documents

A question for the next management meeting

How long would it take us today to produce every document we hold about one counterparty, and how would we prove to an auditor that the list is complete?

Implementation approach

What we deliver, and what we need from you to start.

We deliver

  • An inventory of the file servers: volumes by age and format, duplication rate, which folder trees are still in use
  • The SharePoint information architecture: sites, libraries, content types, columns and permissions, agreed with the business
  • Classification models: document processing for Microsoft 365 for born-digital files, UiPath Document Understanding for your scans
  • The migration engine with hashing, deduplication, version logic, a manifest and a reconciliation report per wave
  • The records layer in Microsoft Purview, the intake rules for scanner and mailbox, and the exception flow in Microsoft Teams

We need from you

  • Read access to the file servers for a service account and a sample of every document type
  • A records owner per business domain and a compliance owner for the file plan and retention periods
  • The current retention policy in whatever state it is in, plus any legal holds in force
  • A decision on what stays out of scope: personal folders, retired systems, content that will be closed

Stages

Inventory

Crawl the drives and measure volumes, duplication, formats and real usage

Architecture

Sites, libraries, content types, columns, permissions, records classes and retention periods

Build

Classification models, migration engine, intake rules, Purview configuration and the Teams review flow

Migration

One domain as a pilot, then wave by wave, each completed source area set read-only behind it

Steady state

Intake live, monitoring, model tuning and the first periodic disposition review

Departmental. Effort follows the number of document types, the quality of the legacy scans and how many folder trees must be reconciled into one architecture, far more than the number of files.