5 E-Signature Myths That Are Costing Your Business Money

Key Takeaways:

• Businesses that delay adopting e-signatures because of legal or security myths lose an average of 6–12 days per contract cycle — directly impacting revenue and cash flow.
• “Free” or basic e-signature tools often introduce hidden costs through manual follow-ups, limited audit trails, and compliance gaps.
• Internal resistance to e-signatures is usually driven by outdated assumptions, not real user behavior — over 80% of customers now expect digital signing as default.
• Choosing a modern platform like ZiaSign can reduce document turnaround time by up to 70% while improving compliance and visibility across teams.

TL;DR:
Many businesses are quietly losing money because they’re operating on outdated beliefs about e-signatures — from legal validity to security and cost. This article breaks down the five most expensive myths, shows what they actually cost in time and revenue, and explains how modern tools like ZiaSign eliminate those losses.

Intro

Most companies don’t think of myths as a line item on their balance sheet. But when it comes to e-signatures, outdated assumptions are silently draining revenue, slowing deals, and increasing operational risk.

In 2025, over 90% of B2B contracts globally include some form of electronic signature, according to data from Deloitte’s Digital Contracting Survey. Yet many organizations still rely on partial digital workflows — emailing PDFs, chasing approvals, or printing “just to be safe.” Those choices add friction at the exact moment speed matters most.

In this article, we’ll unpack five e-signature myths that are costing your business money, quantify the impact of each one, and show how modern e-signature platforms are designed to remove these hidden costs — without disrupting how your teams already work.

Myth #1: “E-Signatures Aren’t Legally Enforceable”

This myth alone delays thousands of deals every year.

In reality, e-signatures are legally binding in over 190 countries under frameworks like the ESIGN Act (U.S.), UETA, and eIDAS (EU). Courts have consistently upheld electronically signed agreements — including high-value commercial contracts — as long as intent, consent, and auditability are documented.

The real cost:
A procurement firm analyzed 1,200 delayed contracts and found that 18% were stalled because someone requested a “wet signature for legal safety.” The average delay? 9.4 days per contract. For sales-driven organizations, that translates into deferred revenue and lost deal momentum.

Modern platforms like ZiaSign automatically generate tamper-evident audit trails, timestamped consent records, and signer authentication logs — the same evidence courts actually rely on. Holding onto this myth doesn’t reduce legal risk; it increases operational drag.

Once legality is settled, the next myth usually centers on security — and it’s just as expensive.

Myth #2: “E-Signatures Aren’t Secure Enough for Sensitive Documents”

Security concerns are valid — but they’re often misdirected.

Paper contracts are lost, altered, or accessed without authorization far more often than digital ones. A 2024 IBM Security report found that paper-based document breaches take 42% longer to detect than digital breaches, largely due to lack of tracking and access controls.

The hidden cost:
Manual document handling increases exposure to data leaks, especially in HR, finance, and legal departments. One mid-sized company reported spending $38,000 in legal and remediation costs after a misplaced signed contract surfaced with outdated terms.

Secure e-signature platforms encrypt documents in transit and at rest, restrict access by role, and log every interaction. ZiaSign, for example, allows administrators to control signer permissions, set expiration dates, and revoke access instantly — controls paper workflows simply can’t match.

When security myths fade, cost myths usually take their place.

Myth #3: “E-Signature Software Is Too Expensive”

This myth often survives because businesses compare subscription fees instead of total process cost.

Let’s break it down. A manual signing process typically involves:

• Document prep and formatting (10–15 minutes)
• Emailing or printing and scanning (15–20 minutes)
• Follow-ups and reminders (multiple touches)
• Manual storage and indexing

Conservatively, that’s 45–60 minutes of staff time per document. At an average loaded labor cost of $45/hour, each contract costs $34–$45 just to process — before delays are factored in.

The reality:
Most modern e-signature tools cost less per month than processing 3–4 contracts manually. ZiaSign users consistently report ROI within the first 30 days, especially in sales ops, HR onboarding, and vendor management.

The real expense isn’t the software — it’s continuing to pay for inefficiency.

Which leads directly to the next misconception.

Myth #4: “Our Customers or Vendors Prefer Paper”

This belief is usually based on anecdote, not data.

According to a 2024 Forrester survey, 83% of B2B buyers prefer digital contracts because they’re faster, easier to track, and reduce back-and-forth. Even in traditionally conservative industries like construction and manufacturing, digital adoption has crossed 70%.

What this myth costs:
When you force paper or email-based signing, you introduce friction at the decision point. One SaaS company measured a 14% drop in close rates when contracts weren’t signable immediately on mobile devices.

E-signatures remove that friction. Platforms like ZiaSign are designed for mobile-first signing, allowing executives, contractors, and clients to sign in under a minute — no downloads, no accounts required.

If customers are ready, the last barrier is usually internal.

Myth #5: “Implementing E-Signatures Will Disrupt Our Workflow”

Change feels risky — especially in document-heavy processes. But modern e-signature tools are built to layer onto existing workflows, not replace them.

The cost of inaction:
Teams that avoid adoption often run hybrid processes: some documents digital, others manual. This creates version confusion, lost files, and inconsistent compliance. One HR team reported spending 6 extra hours per week reconciling signed onboarding documents across systems.

ZiaSign integrates with existing document storage, supports reusable templates, and standardizes signing without forcing teams to relearn their jobs. Most organizations are fully operational in days, not months.

Once implementation fear is removed, the financial upside becomes obvious.

Conclusion

E-signature myths persist because they feel safe — familiar processes, known risks, and “the way we’ve always done it.” But familiarity has a cost. Slower deals, higher labor spend, and unnecessary risk compound quietly over time.

Replacing assumptions with data is where savings begin. Modern e-signature platforms don’t just digitize signatures; they compress timelines, reduce errors, and give teams visibility they’ve never had before. If you want to see what that looks like in practice, ZiaSign offers a straightforward way to modernize signing without disrupting your operations — and without paying for complexity you don’t need.

This article is part of ZiaSign's comprehensive resource library. Explore more guides at ziasign.com/blogs, or try our tools free at ziasign.com.