Whining Again About Paper Choices

Doc hates to be a whiner, but I just returned from a very high-end conference and it reminded me again how many businesses are penny wise and pound foolish. For the handout booklet at this event was a very well produced, spiral bound, full color booklet that should have looked very nice. But instead of springing for a few extra cents per page, the producers chose to print this booklet on the cheapest, thinnest paper available – probably the "default" paper loaded in the machine.

Doc knows how much work went into this handout – the binding alone had to take some serious staff time or racked up a decent bill at the local copy shop. And yet, despite all the work there was terrible bleed through and the pages even tore at the binding after being turned a few times.

Let's not lose site of the advantages of high-quality printing, which can and often does take place in house with MFP machines. And a good choice of paper stock is part of what makes for decent results. Clearly, many offices simply choose the lowest-cost paper stock without much consideration for quality.

And if looks aren't enough, how about reliability? Doc has found that the cheaper, thinner paper typically jams more often than something with a little more heft. What is the cost of lost productivity and paper thrown in the garbage?

So please people, let's not always default to the cheapest paper – that may be an obvious way to save money, but if it sacrifices company image or brand integrity, was it really worth it?