Electronic signatures are becoming increasingly popular in today’s digital world. They offer numerous benefits, including increased efficiency, convenience, and less of an environmental impact. Not only that, it’s far more secure than traditional typed signatures used in PDFs. In fact, there are risks of not using electronic signatures at all.
However, not using electronic signatures can also pose several risks. Here, we take a look at the 7 greatest of these risks of not using electronic signatures.
1. It’s less secure
This is one of the biggest risks of not using electronic signatures. Wet or PDF signatures can be easily forged or tampered with, increasing the risk of fraud or identity theft. We’ve all seen Bette Davis learn to copy Blanche’s signature in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane.
Electronic signatures provide better security measures, such as encryption and digital certificates, to prevent these types of incidents. As organizations continue to operate in an increasingly digital landscape, the risk of data breaches, cyberattacks, and identity theft has become part of our everyday life, something which electronic signatures provide that extra layer of protection against.
Wet signatures are particularly vulnerable to these types of attacks, as they can be easily replicated and manipulated. Electronic signatures, on the other hand, provide a more secure method of signing documents, ensuring that sensitive information remains confidential and protected.
Read also: How to get the most out of AI in your contract work
2. Not using e-signatures risks: It’s a slower way of working
Wet signatures require printing, signing, and scanning, which can be a pain, and lead to delays that you can ill afford. Even PDF signatures can require a lot of back and forth, creating endless email threads in the process.
Electronic signatures streamline this process, allowing for rapid turnaround times, and improved overall efficiency. In today’s fast-paced world, time is money. So, organizations that rely on wet or PDF signatures may find themselves falling behind their competition. Electronic signatures, however, can give you an edge, with confirmation and signing times being reduced from hours or days to mere seconds.
3. It’s more expensive to keep it analogue
Electronic signatures eliminate the need for the poorly stocked, often robbed stationary cupboard; thereby, reducing costs associated with printing and mailing. In addition to the direct costs associated with wet signatures, such as paper, ink, and postage, there are also indirect costs that can add up over time.
A classic example of this would be that wet signatures, like PDF signatures, can cause delays, which can result in missed opportunities and lost revenue. Electronic signatures, on the other hand, eliminate these costs, allowing organizations to save money and improve their bottom line.
4.There’s less access for you and your counterparties
Wet signatures require physical presence, which can be difficult in certain situations. Electronic signatures can be made anywhere, and at any time, so long as the internet holds out.
With the rise of remote work and the increasing prevalence of mobile devices, the ability to sign documents from anywhere has become a key requirement for many organizations.
Wet signatures, however, require physical presence, which can be a significant obstacle in certain situations. Electronic signatures, on the other hand, provide the flexibility and convenience that organizations need to stay agile and responsive.
Read also: Electronic signature: The benefits and how it works
5. There’s potential for shakier legal compliance
Wet signatures may not meet legal requirements in certain situations, leading to disputes or legal issues. Electronic signatures can meet legal requirements and provide a more secure and verifiable method of signing documents anywhere where they’re legal.
With the ever-increasing number of regulations and compliance requirements, it’s essential for organizations to ensure that their signatures meet legal requirements.
Wet signatures may not always meet these requirements, which can result in disputes or legal issues. Electronic signatures, on the other hand, provide a more secure and verifiable method of signing documents, ensuring that organizations stay compliant and avoid legal issues. This is one of the biggest risks of not using electronic signatures.
6. There’s greater scope for mistakes
Wet signatures can be illegible, be smudged or missing important information, leading to errors or misunderstandings.
Electronic signatures provide a clear and concise record of the signing process, reducing the risk of errors. After all, errors can be costly. PDFsignatures are also vulnerable to errors, as a name can be misspelled or typed incorrectly by either party.
Electronic signatures, however, provide a clear and concise record of the signing process, reducing the risk of errors, and ensuring that everyone is on the same page.
Read also: Contract lifecycle management: A complete guide
7. Everything’s harder to audit
Wet signatures, and some PDF signatures, don’t provide an audit trail, making it difficult to track the signing process, or determine who’s actually signed the document.
Electronic signatures provide a detailed audit trail, including timestamps and IP addresses, to improve accountability and transparency. In many industries that use electronic signatures, these have become essential aspects.
The key takeaways
Not using electronic signatures can pose several risks, including security, inefficiency, increased costs, limited access, legal issues, risk of errors, and lack of an audit trail. By implementing electronic signature solutions, these risks can be mitigated, leading to improved efficiency, security, and overall productivity.
Electronic signatures offer a more secure, efficient, and cost-effective method of signing documents, allowing organizations to stay ahead of the curve and remain competitive in today’s fast-paced business environment.
