The quarterly publication of the International Legal Technology Association
Issue link: https://epubs.iltanet.org/i/271291
PEER TO PEER: THE QUARTERLY MAGA ZINE OF ILTA 8 BEST PRACTICES what security and support it may or may not require. We need to be mindful that convenience is a legitimate application feature, but, in the legal sector, it cannot be the only consideration. FEATURES ALREADY AVAILABLE The good news is the functionality provided by these subversive applications is often already being offered by IT. In these cases, we need to make users aware of how to access the functionality within the firm's security parameters. If an attorney is attempting to replace an existing application or workflow with a simplified application, we have the opportunity to educate. It's important to teach the attorney how to use the existing system and to provide the compelling reasons why applications and security are configured as they are. We have wide-ranging governance obligations, and most of those obligations are non- negotiable. Finding ways to articulate IT policy clearly is an important step toward gaining user cooperation. applications places client data in ungovernable and unacceptable locations. While this might make the data easier to find and access, it also makes data less secure and easier to share. The primary attraction of this type of application is often its ability to subvert IT's control. For example, an attorney isn't likely to turn to an online word processing application because Microsoft Word fails to deliver the features they need. Rather, the goal might be the perceived convenience of being able to avoid two-factor authentication or document profiling since the online word processor application removes the need to log in to an enterprise system. Unfortunately, the advantage the attorney has gained in convenience is undone by losses in security, accountability and compliance. While it should never be the goal of IT to introduce unnecessary complexity, we are compelled by a multitude of forces to safeguard work product to an acceptable standard. When we evaluate an application request, it's important to note what the application does, how it does it and There is considerable difficulty in implementing and integrating new consumer- driven technologies responsibly. While some applications would be classified as "noise," adding more risk than benefit for the firm, other technology requests signal genuine opportunities to deliver enhanced service, better security, increased education and improved technology to our attorneys. APPLICATIONS THAT ARE NOISE There are applications that seem attractive because they promise improved simplicity or accessibility. Too often, implementing these Signal vs. Noise: Opportunities in Consumerization About the Author Doug Webster is the Manager of Practice Support at Porter Wright Morris & Arthur LLP. With over 12 years of experience in legal IT, Doug manages a team responsible for the desktop, desktop hardware and all firm applications for 375 users in six offices. He can be contacted at dwebster@porterwright.com. True to the IT consumerization movement, attorneys are becoming more enthusiastic about integrating new applications and technologies into their practices. Some of these applications fill gaps in current IT offerings. With others, simplification appears to be the core function of the application, and that simplification is often at the expense of effective information governance. Attorneys are finding applications that fill service gaps in our IT offerings.