Technology

Technology Implementation: Process Before Purchase And Data Before Decision

Biglaw can learn a lot from the best practices of small firms when it comes to technology investments.

By  
on

Attorneys appear to have a love-hate relationship with technology. Some have adopted core administrative systems, like practice management, and stopped there. Others are embracing all things technology and automating everything possible. Overall, solo attorneys and lawyers in small firms make relatively fast decisions to implement new software in comparison to larger firms. Therefore, Biglaw can learn from the best practices of small firms when it comes to analyzing process and needs prior to technology investments, even at an individual attorney level.

Before we dive in, a quick word about change: if you don’t want to change, don’t bother purchasing technology. While this may sound harsh, it will save you time and money in the long run. It’s almost impossible to automate without making any changes to a manual process. Even if you added in simple appointment-setting software, change is necessary for how you or your assistant field calls and website enquiries. Without an open mind to process change, you may purchase systems that are never used.

Next, it’s vital to understand that the total cost for a new solution not only includes the software purchase price but also firm personnel time. If the technology project involves lawyers’ time, that time has an opportunity cost. In other words, if the attorney is taken away from billable work, that lost time is valued at what would have been earned, not at the attorney’s pay rate. Finally, ensure that you look to purchase technology and implement change to solve the most critical problem facing your firm.

Process before Purchase

Now with an open mind to change, the first step is to review the process associated with the potential technology purchase. Don’t worry, a sophisticated approach is not required to analyze your processes; you need just people, Post-it® notes, and markers or a white board, plus a brainstorming mind-set.

  • Gather everyone involved in the process, lawyers and staff;
  • Map out the process on the white board or wall using post-its and markers;
  • Ensure that you detail the steps and who is doing each step;
  • Review the process for bottlenecks, duplicate steps, gaps, or opportunities for technology and change;
  • Create a new version of the process and identify necessary data (see data section below);
  • Experiment with the new process for a set period of time and gather data – the minimum recommended period is a month (no technology implementation yet!);
  • Review the results and make adjustments or additional changes; and
  • Recommend technology solutions.

In Biglaw, involve a few lawyers who are involved in the actual process being reviewed and who are open to innovation. Automating a bad process with technology is a poor business decision because you are not only missing an opportunity for improvement but you might be choosing the wrong technology solution.

Sponsored

Data before Decision

For over thirty years, I have worked with billable hours in and around various professions and businesses, including Canadian Biglaw. I have witnessed technology implementation delays and failures that range from small to massive. Other than a lack of planning or willingness to change, these projects failed because of a lack of data. In many instances, technology was purchased to fix the problem without hard data demonstrating the actual pain point. Therefore, systems are implemented but the problems persist.

Data replaces the gut feel or impulse decision to purchase technology as the fix for a problem. Identifying the proper data takes place when the process is mapped out as outlined above. In order to avoid the “garbage in, garbage out” problem with bad data that leads to incorrect conclusions, adopt this approach:

  • Identify the start of the process and all the input data;
  • Gather data at the earliest point possible and ensure that input data is tracked and updated throughout; and
  • Identify the output data plus the metrics and benchmarks to define success.

For example, if you are looking at the new client process and decisions around customer relationship management, calendaring, or search-engine optimization and website analytics technology, it’s critical to capture the data when the clients first contact the firm. After identifying the source of the potential client, track all the interactions with the potential client until they either become a new client, are referred elsewhere, or chose another firm. Use the data to make your decisions to invest or automate the process.

Sponsored

Analyzing processes does not have to wait for technology purchases. Best practices include regular reviews set for each process: monthly, quarterly, or semi-annually, depending on practice size. Also, because many Biglaw attorneys run their practice or practice groups as almost stand-alone units, the above approach can easily be applied within mid-size and larger firms.  A final note: change is continuous, and process review and experiments are never complete.

Please reach out on Twitter (@maryjuetten) to join the conversation on how Biglaw can learn from small law.

Mary E. Juetten

Mary E. Juetten lives on the West Coast, holds a J.D., and is both an American and Canadian professional accountant. Mary is passionate about metrics that matter and access to justice. She founded Traklight and Evolve Law and consults as an Access Advocate for LegalShield. You can reach her by email at info@evolvelawnow.com or on Twitter: @maryjuetten.

CRM Banner

Topics

, , , , ,