Peer to Peer Magazine

March 2014

The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association

Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/271291

Contents of this Issue

Navigation

Page 34 of 77

PEER TO PEER: THE QUARTERLY MAGA ZINE OF ILTA 36 (e-learning, podcasts, walking the floor, etc.) and mandated. Many firms have started adopting a variety of these methods, some have increased the size of internal training teams, and others rely on partners for supplemental support. NEED FOR TOOLS With the recognized need for training and the more recent understanding of the value proper training can bring to the equation, the logical next step turns to providing tools to maximize efficiency. This is the promise of technology. All firms rely on some office suite, typically Microsoft Office. The vast majority of firms also employ an enterprise content management system or a document management system (DMS). Historically, a DMS was implemented with the promise of efficiency gains. Ironically, many of these systems were implemented at a time when clients weren't questioning billable hours (to the extent they do now), so those efficiency gains actually translated to fewer billable hours — a clear negative return on investment. Today, with the pressure to contain fees or costs, firms correctly using a DMS should be gaining from that efficiency. Beyond a DMS, firms typically have finance or practice management systems (or, in some cases, full enterprise resource planning solutions). These are critical to running the business yet do little for improving lawyer efficiency, though they provide valuable data to help analyze that efficiency. Beyond that, there are numerous ancillary tools and products that are deployed specifically to help lawyers work more efficiently: document comparison, document assembly, templates, reference checking, formatting tools and more. IT department effectiveness partly hinges on the team's ability to connect successfully the various disparate applications and systems to ensure their stable operation and seamless integration, thus achieving maximum value. Many firms prefer to implement "best of breed" solutions. Whereas smaller firms oftentimes employ case management or other fully integrated practice management solutions that provide DMS and all other necessary functionality, it's rare to find larger firms doing the same. Rarely are products scalable or capable of incorporating the broad how long certain tasks should take (with proper technology use), they would not be willing to pay for any more time than that. Firms needn't write off billable time when lawyers complete tasks within expected and appropriate time scales. Similarly, firms shouldn't have to invest more lawyer time to complete tasks under fixed fees; to do so would cost the firm and directly reduce profit. It's now clearly in law firms' best interests to ensure their lawyers are completing work as efficiently as possible. This means firms should be ensuring their lawyers know how to use technology tools; otherwise, they are practically throwing away money. Thus, we should be seeing a renewed interest in training. Firms will need to be proactive and not limit training to the occasional "new starter" or introductory overview. Even in firms where managing partners might be loath to push their fellow partners into working in ways they previously found "uncomfortable" or "unnecessary," those same managing partners and their management committees need to pressure their partners into working within the new reality; it's a hindrance — and a financial problem — to not use technology properly. To meet this need, firms need options and creativity — and they need to make training more engaging. Gone are the days of shuffling lawyers into classrooms to sit through demos of systems; training must be interactive, offered via various media era of the demanding — and switched-on — general counsel. D. Casey Flaherty, General Counsel for Kia Motors, has recently won many supporters among the ranks of CIOs, trainers and IT departments. He has "called out" many lawyers and firms for their lack of technology skills and failure to invest appropriately in training. He designed a technology audit that he gives to his outside counsel. A technologically proficient lawyer should be able to complete it in 30 minutes. Amazingly, he has yet to see any pass, and some candidates have taken as long as five hours to complete the audit. He has offered the audit for free to all other GCs to use with their outside counsel. Flaherty has declared that outside counsel (i.e., law firms) must use technology efficiently or receive reduced hourly fees (if they are inefficient, he argues, he should not have to pay the additional cost for the extra time it takes them to complete work). In addition, the ABA's recent update to its model rules now states that lawyers must understand the tools required to perform their jobs; it's no longer acceptable for lawyers to not use technology correctly. As such, training has finally taken its much- needed front seat. A recent study found a correlation between firms' proper use of technology and their billable hours recorded, as well as their realization of those hours billed. Common sense should confirm that if a client knows Lawyers must understand the tools required to perform their jobs; it's no longer acceptable for lawyers to not use technology correctly.

Articles in this issue

Archives of this issue

view archives of Peer to Peer Magazine - March 2014